Fashion versus reason--then and now.

Fashion versus reason--then and now. Analogies between modern practice and prehistoric material cultureare becoming increasingly useful for archaeologists, including thoseinterested in branding studies, for example (e.g. Wengrow, in press) andat formal research centres such as the AHRC AHRC Asian Human Rights CommissionAHRC Arts and Humanities Research Council (UK)AHRC American Homeowners Resource CenterAHRC Army Human Resources CommandAHRC Association for the Help of Retarded Children Centre for the Evolution ofCultural Diversity and the Santa Fe Institute. Studies of moderncultural change--at a level of detail that most archaeologists can onlydream about--can lead to related insights about prehistoric culturechange through time. Modern fashion analysis can be methodologicallysimilar to testing, for example, the degree to which certain prehistorictransitions reflect demographic change (e.g. Shennan 2000; Henrich2004). How much of the Upper Palaeolithic 'revolution' in caveart is due to increases in population in western Europe? Although thedata are trickier to obtain, the goal is basically the same--subtractwhat is considered background (e.g. population size) from what is ofinterest to the researcher (e.g. instances of particular art motifs). InNeolithic Germany, for example, pottery designs can be treated as the'fashions' and numbers of longhouses are used to estimatepopulation size (e.g. Shennan & Wilkinson 2001; Bentley &Shennan 2003). Conceptualised this way, the study of material culture popularitycan take advantage of sophisticated tools from network theory (e.g.Watts 2003) and population genetics Population geneticsThe study of both experimental and theoretical consequences of mendelian heredity on the population level, in contradistinction to classical genetics which deals with the offspring of specified parents on the familial level. (e.g. Cavalli-Sforza & Feldman1981; Ammerman & Cavalli-Sforza 1984; Bentley et al. 2004). Theresulting culture evolution models, in all their variety (e.g. Mesoudiet al. 2006; Shennan 2002 for reviews) can generally be divided into twocamps. The first treats individuals as independent decision-makers whoweigh the costs and benefits of their options, while subject to variousbiases of influence (e.g. Winterhalder & Smith 2000; Henrich &Gil-White 2001; Gintis 2007; McElreath & Boyd 2007). This applieswell to behaviours or technology that serve some adaptive purpose, i.e.that matter to human survival, such as the conversion from foraging tofarming (e.g. Renfrew 1978), or the spread of a useful technology (e.g.Rogers 1962; Henrich 2001). Even art, if it imparts some meaningfulsignal (e.g. mating potential), can be governed by cost/benefitdecisions (e.g. Bliege Bird & Smith 2005; Geher & Miller 2007). At the other end of the spectrum are behaviours that do notinherently 'matter', and for which there is often a large,maybe infinite, variety of options--decorative designs, musical motifs,and word forms, for example. These choices can be considered'neutral' traits, in that what is chosen has no inherent valuerelative to other available options (Binford 1963; Koerper & Stickel1980; Gillespie 1998). It assumes that whether a mother names her girl'Jane' or 'Jamelia' depends on the current usage ofthe name, rather than the name itself. This is formalised Adj. 1. formalised - concerned with or characterized by rigorous adherence to recognized forms (especially in religion or art); "highly formalized plays like `Waiting for Godot'"formalistic, formalized as the randomcopying or neutral model, akin to the neutral-trait model of populationgenetics, for popular culture change (e.g. Neiman 1995; Lipo et al.1997; Shennan & Wilkinson 2001; Bentley & Shennan 2003; Hahn& Bentley 2003). Crucially, it is not proposed that people act randomly, but thatthe statistics of all their choices, at the population level, arecomparable to random copying. It is in deliberate contrast toindependent decisions--actions under random copying depend entirely onwhat others are doing. Applied to prehistoric studies, the model simplyallows us to ask, what if everyone simply copied each other, withoccasional innovation? Against this background 'canvas', moreinteresting phenomena become visible (e.g. Herzog et al. 2004; Eerkens& Lipo 2005). Shennan and Wilkinson (2001), for example, observedthat pottery design frequencies fit neutral model predictions for theEarly but not the Late Linearbandkeramik (LBK LBK Lubbock (Texas)LBK Linearbandkeramik (European Archaeological Culture)LBK Landing Barge, Kitchen (US Navy)LBK Lutherske BekjennelseskirkeLBK Location-Based Key ), which in turn suggeststhat either people were becoming more creative or they were receivingnew ideas from outside communities. In any case, these new insightsabout Late LBK society were made possible by use of the neutral (randomcopying) model, just through analysing the frequencies of potterydesigns in one location. Given the two extremes--random copying versus independentdecisions--often the question is where behaviours lie on the spectrumbetween them (e.g. Collard collardHeadless form of cabbage (Brassica oleracea, Acephala group), in the mustard family. It bears the same botanical name as kale, differing only in that collard leaves are much broader, are not frilled, and resemble the rosette leaves of head cabbage. et al. 2006). For example, with independent,rational thinking, behaviours should converge upon the collectivepriorities of individuals (Dunnell 1978; Surowiecki 2004). On the otherhand, random copying with occasional innovation leads our collectivetastes to drift continually, in directions that are unpredictable(Salganik et al. 2006), but at a rate that is steady and predicted bythe level of innovation (Bentley et al. 2007). Crucially, we need notdecide beforehand what is subject to drift, as this is just what we aimto find out empirically, using these contrasting models for the patternsof change through time. These observations apply equally to the debate about academicwriting, and were prompted by Stephen Chrisomalis (2007), who raises anexcellent point in response to Bentley (2006): in evaluating fashiontrends, one must take the background into account. In the case ofacademic publishing today, the appearances of all keywords haveincreased since 1990, due to a roughly fourfold increase in recordedjournal pages during that period (cf. Chrisomalis 2007: Figure 1).However, both 'agency' and 'nuanced' still qualifyas buzzwords against this rising background: 'agency'increasing tenfold since 1990 (Bentley 2006: Figure 1), and'nuanced' increasing fourfold since 1997, after the expansionof journals had already levelled off (cf. Chrisomalis 2007: Figure 1).There are other ways to demonstrate this language copying--a quickGoogle search for 'a more nuanced understanding of' (exactphrase) receives fully a third as many hits as 'nuancedunderstanding' and twice as many hits as anything 'lessnuanced' at all. Orwell (1946) was absolutely right about thecopying of strips of words. I have fretted about academic jargon becauseit demonstrates the continual flux and empirical patterns of randomcopying (Simkin & Roychowdhury 2003; Bentley 2006), which impliesthat buzzwords do not matter in a meaningful, scientific sense. This isa natural part of human interaction, however. The language copying thatOrwell (1946) was bemoaning reflects, for better or worse, ourremarkable ability to imitate--a prerequisite for culture itself. References AMMERMAN, A.J. & L.L. CAVALLI-SFORZA. 1984. The NeolithicTransition and the Genetics of Populations in Europe. Princeton (NJ):Princeton University Press. BENTLEY, R.A. 2006. Academic copying, archaeology and the Englishlanguage. Antiquity 80: 196-201. BENTLEY, R.A. & S.J. SHENNAN. 2003. Cultural evolution andstochastic network growth. American Antiquity 68: 459-85. BENTLEY, R.A., M.W. HAHN & S.J. SHENNAN. 2004. Random drift andculture change. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 271: 1443-50. BENTLEY, R.A., C.P. LIPO, H.A. HERZOG & M.W. HAHN. 2007.Regular rates of popular culture change reflect random copying.Evolution and Human Behavior Evolution and Human Behavior is an interdisciplinary journal, presenting research reports and theory in which evolutionary perspectives are brought to bear on the study of human behavior. 28: 151-58. BINFORD, L. 1963. "Red ochre" caches from the Michiganarea: a possible case of cultural drift. Southwestern Journal ofAnthropology 19: 89-108. BLIEGE BIRD, R. & E. ALDEN SMITH. 2005. Signaling theory,strategic interaction, and symbolic capital. Current Anthropology 46:221-48. CAVALLI-SFORZA, L.L. & M.W. FELDMAN (ed.) 1981. CulturalTransmission and Evolution: a quantitative approach. Princeton (NJ):Princeton University Press. CHRISOMALIS, S. 2007. The perils of pseudo-Orwellianism. Antiquity81: 204-7. COLLARD M., S.J. SHENNAN & J.J. TEHRANI. 2006. Branching,blending and the evolution of cultural similarities and differencesamong human populations. Evolution and Human Behavior 27: 169-84. DUNNELL, R.C. 1978. Style and function: a fundamental dichotomy.American Antiquity 43: 192-202. EERKENS, J. & C.P. LIPO. 2005. Cultural transmission and thegeneration, maintenance, and propagation of variation in thearchaeological record. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 24:316-34. GEHER, G. & G.F. MILLER (ed.) 2007. Mating Intelligence. Mahwah(NJ): Erlbaum. GILLESPIE, J.H. 1998. Population Genetics: a Concise Guide.Baltimore (MD): Johns Hopkins University Johns Hopkins University,mainly at Baltimore, Md. Johns Hopkins in 1867 had a group of his associates incorporated as the trustees of a university and a hospital, endowing each with $3.5 million. Daniel C. Press. GINTIS, H. 2007. A framework for the unification of the behaviouralsciences. Behavioral and Brain Sciences Behavioral and Brain Sciences (BBS), founded in 1978 and published by Cambridge University Press, is a journal of Open Peer Commentary modeled on the journal Current Anthropology 30: 1-61. HAHN, M.W. & R.A. BENTLEY. 2003. Drift as a mechanism forcultural change: an example from baby names. Proceedings of the RoyalSociety B 270: S1-S4. HENRICH, J. 2001. Cultural transmission and the diffusion ofinnovations The study of the diffusion of innovation is the study of how, why, and at what rate new ideas and technology spread through cultures.This research topic began in the 1950s at the University of Chicago with funding from television producers who sought a way to measure the . American Anthropologist 103: 992-1013. --2004. Demography and cultural evolution: why adaptive culturalprocesses produced maladaptive MaladaptiveUnsuitable or counterproductive; for example, maladaptive behavior is behavior that is inappropriate to a given situation.Mentioned in: Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy losses in Tasmania. American Antiquity69: 197-211. HENRICH, J. & F.J. GIL-WHITE. 2001. The evolution of prestige:freely conferred deference as a mechanism for enhancing the benefits ofcultural transmission. Evolution and Human Behavior 22: 165-96. HERZOG, H.A., R.A. BENTLEY & M.W. HAHN. 2004. Random drift andlarge shifts in popularity of dog breeds. Proceedings of the RoyalSociety B 271: S353-56. KOERPER, H.C. & E.G. STICKEL 1980. Cultural Drift: A primaryprocess of culture change. Journal of Anthropological Research 36:463-69. LIPO, C.P., M.E. MADSEN, R.C. DUNNELL & T. HUNT 1997.Population structure, cultural transmission and frequency seriation.Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 16: 301-33. McELREATH, R. & R. BOYD. 2007. Mathematical Models of SocialEvolution: a Guide for the Perplexed. Chicago (IL): University ofChicago Press The University of Chicago Press is the largest university press in the United States. It is operated by the University of Chicago and publishes a wide variety of academic titles, including The Chicago Manual of Style, dozens of academic journals, including . MESOUDI, A., A. WHITEN & K.N. LALAND. 2006. Towards a unifiedscience of cultural evolution. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 29: 329-47. NEIMAN, F.D. 1995. Stylistic variation in evolutionary perspective.American Antiquity 60: 7-36. ORWELL, G. 1946. Politics and the English language Politics and the English Language (1946) is an essay by George Orwell wherein he criticizes "ugly and inaccurate" contemporary written English, and asserts that it was both a cause and an effect of foolish thinking and dishonest politics. , in The PenguinEssays of George Orwell George Orwell (pseudonym of Eric Arthur Blair, the influential English author and critic) published two volumes of his essays during his life, Inside the Whale and Other Essays in 1940, and Critical Essays in 1946. : 348-60. London: Penguin. RENFREW, C. 1978. Trajectory, discontinuity and morphogenesis morphogenesis/mor��pho��gen��e��sis/ (mor?fo-jen��e-sis) the evolution and development of form, as the development of the shape of a particular organ or part of the body, or the development undergone by individuals who attain the type to : theimplications of catastrophe theory catastrophe theoryBranch of mathematics (considered a branch of geometry) that explores how gradual changes to a system produce sudden, drastic results (though usually not as dire as the name suggests). for archaeology. American Antiquity43: 203-22. ROGERS, E.M. 1962. Diffusion of Innovations. New York New York, state, United StatesNew York,Middle Atlantic state of the United States. It is bordered by Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and the Atlantic Ocean (E), New Jersey and Pennsylvania (S), Lakes Erie and Ontario and the Canadian province of : Free Press. SALGANIK, M.J., P.S. DODDS DODDS Department Of Defense Dependents Schools & D.J. WATTS. 2006. Experimentalstudy of inequality and unpredictability in an artificial culturalmarket. Science 311: 854-56. SHENNAN, S.J. 2000. Population, culture history, and the dynamicsof change. Current Anthropology 41: 811-35. --2002. Genes, Memes and Human History. London: Thames &Hudson. SHENNAN, S.J. & J.R. WILKINSON. 2001. Ceramic style change andneutral evolution: a case study from Neolithic Europe. AmericanAntiquity 66: 577-94. SIMKIN, M.V. & V.P. ROYCHOWDHURY. 2003. Read before you cite!Complex Systems 14: 269. SUROWIECKI, J. 2004. The Wisdom of Crowds: Why the Many Are Smarterthan the Few. London: Abacus. WATTS, D.J. 2003. Six Degrees: The Science of a Connected Age.London: Heinemann. WENGROW, D. In press. Prehistoric commodity branding. CurrentAnthropology. WINTERHALDER, B. & E. ALDEN SMITH. 2000. Analyzing adaptivestrategies: human behavioral ecology Human behavioral ecology (HBE) or human evolutionary ecology applies the principles of evolutionary theory and optimization to the study of human behavioral and cultural diversity. at twenty-five. EvolutionaryAnthropology 9: 51-72. R. Alexander Bentley, AHRC Centre for the Evolution of CulturalDiversity, Department of Anthropology, Durham University, 43 Old Elvet,Durham DH1 3HN, UK (Email: r.a.bentley@durham.ac.uk)