Testing the art as adaptation hypothesis through artistic practice and reproductive success in Papua woodcarvers.

Archaeological studies provide evidence that art was a well-established activity among Homo sapiens as early as 50,000 to 75,000 years ago. Today, people continue to spontaneously create artistic works from an early age, and some master artistic skills with such proficiency that they become known as artists. Considering the ubiquitous nature of art, many evolutionary-oriented scholars have pondered the potential role of art, proposing the 'art as an adaptation hypothesis', according to which art serves social functions that promote the survival and reproductive success of individuals. Surprisingly, very few attempts have been made to verify this hypothesis empirically. Here, we addressed this issue, investigating whether art can be an adaptation: that is, whether it can increase the reproductive success of the artist. We collected data from indigenous inhabitants of Papua (Asmat and Kamoro societies), including 101 self-described carvers (artists) and 130 non-artists. Unadjusted models suggested that Asmat and Kamoro artists have higher reproductive success (measured by the number of their children), although this association disappeared in models adjusted for potentially relevant confounds. We also found that the relationship between reproductive success and being an artist can be partly explained by artists' higher conscientiousness and creativity. While it would be plausible to explain artistic behaviour as an adaptation, the data are also compatible with such behaviours being by-products of an adaptation.