Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40199348›Full record

ArticleJournal of the Royal Society, Interface2025

Mutual benefits of social learning and algorithmic mediation for cumulative culture.

Agnieszka Czaplicka, Fabian Baumann, Iyad Rahwan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the Royal Society, Interface, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

3 authors.

Agnieszka CzaplickaCenter for Humans and Machines, Max Planck Institute for Human Development , Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-7248-7557
Fabian BaumannCenter for Humans and Machines, Max Planck Institute for Human Development , Berlin, Germany.
Iyad RahwanCenter for Humans and Machines, Max Planck Institute for Human Development , Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-1796-4303

Funding

Warsaw University of Technology
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The remarkable ecological success of humans is often attributed to our ability to develop complex cultural artefacts that enable us to cope with environmental challenges. The evolution of complex culture (cumulative cultural evolution) is usually modelled as a collective process in which individuals invent new artefacts (innovation) and copy information from others (social learning). This classic picture overlooks the growing role of intelligent algorithms in the digital age (e.g. search engines, recommender systems and large language models) in mediating information between humans, with potential consequences for cumulative cultural evolution. Building on a previous model, we investigate the combined effects of network-based social learning and a simplistic version of algorithmic mediation on cultural accumulation. We find that algorithmic mediation significantly impacts cultural accumulation and that this impact grows as social networks become less densely connected. Cultural accumulation is most effective when social learning and algorithmic mediation are combined, and the optimal ratio depends on the network's density. This work is an initial step towards formalizing the impact of intelligent algorithms on cumulative cultural evolution within an established framework. Models like ours provide insights into mechanisms of human-machine interaction in cultural contexts, guiding hypotheses for future experimental testing.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsCultural EvolutionModels, TheoreticalSocial LearningHumansalgorithmic mediationcumulative cultural evolutionexploration–exploitation trade-offrecommender systemssocial learningsocial networks

Identifiers

PMID40199348
PMCPMC11978438

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.