Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37531351›Full record

ArticlePloS one2023

An economic model and evidence of the evolution of human intelligence in the Middle Pleistocene: Climate change and assortative mating.

Bruce C Petersen

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 41% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Bruce C PetersenDepartment of Economics, Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-0874-3020
Washington University in St. Louis · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A main objective of this paper is to provide the first model of how climate change, working through sexual selection, could have led to dramatic increases in hominin brain size, and presumably intelligence, in the Middle Pleistocene. The model is built using core elements from the field of family economics, including assortative mating and specialization and complementarities between mates. The main assumptions are that family public goods (e.g., conversation, shelter, fire) were particularly cognitively intensive to produce and became increasingly important for child survival during glacial phases. Intermediate climates (e.g., not the depths of severe glacial phases) create the largest gains from specialization, encouraging negative assortative mating. In contrast, severe glacial phases encourage positive assortative mating because of the rising importance of family public goods. One testable hypothesis is that absence of severe glacial phases should have led to stasis in brain size. Two other testable hypotheses are that severe glacial phases should have led to speciation events, as well as increases in brain size. The evidence shows that there was a million-year stasis in cranial size prior to the start of the severe glacial phases. This stasis is broken by a speciation event (Homo heidelbergensis), with the oldest fossil evidence dated near the close of the first severe glacial phase. In the next 300 kyr, there are two additional severe glacial phases, accompanied by considerable increases in cranial capacity. The last speciation event is Homo sapiens, with the earliest fossils dated near the end of the last of these two glacial phases.

Indexed as

Climate ChangeHominidaeAnimalsBiological EvolutionChildFossilsHumansModels, EconomicSkull

Identifiers

PMID37531351
PMCPMC10395973
OpenAlexW4385489498

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.