Elizabeth M. Speechley, Benjamin J. Ashton, Yong Zhi Foo, Leigh W. Simmons, Amanda R. Ridley
{"title":"Meta-analyses reveal support for the Social Intelligence Hypothesis","authors":"Elizabeth M. Speechley, Benjamin J. Ashton, Yong Zhi Foo, Leigh W. Simmons, Amanda R. Ridley","doi":"10.1111/brv.13103","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The Social Intelligence Hypothesis (SIH) is one of the leading explanations for the evolution of cognition. Since its inception a vast body of literature investigating the predictions of the SIH has accumulated, using a variety of methodologies and species. However, the generalisability of the hypothesis remains unclear. To gain an understanding of the robustness of the SIH as an explanation for the evolution of cognition, we systematically searched the literature for studies investigating the predictions of the SIH. Accordingly, we compiled 103 studies with 584 effect sizes from 17 taxonomic orders. We present the results of four meta-analyses which reveal support for the SIH across interspecific, intraspecific and developmental studies. However, effect sizes did not differ significantly between the cognitive or sociality metrics used, taxonomy or testing conditions. Thus, support for the SIH is similar across studies using neuroanatomy and cognitive performance, those using broad categories of sociality, group size and social interactions, across taxonomic groups, and for tests conducted in captivity or the wild. Overall, our meta-analyses support the SIH as an evolutionary and developmental explanation for cognitive variation.</p>","PeriodicalId":133,"journal":{"name":"Biological Reviews","volume":"99 5","pages":"1889-1908"},"PeriodicalIF":11.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/brv.13103","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biological Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/brv.13103","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The Social Intelligence Hypothesis (SIH) is one of the leading explanations for the evolution of cognition. Since its inception a vast body of literature investigating the predictions of the SIH has accumulated, using a variety of methodologies and species. However, the generalisability of the hypothesis remains unclear. To gain an understanding of the robustness of the SIH as an explanation for the evolution of cognition, we systematically searched the literature for studies investigating the predictions of the SIH. Accordingly, we compiled 103 studies with 584 effect sizes from 17 taxonomic orders. We present the results of four meta-analyses which reveal support for the SIH across interspecific, intraspecific and developmental studies. However, effect sizes did not differ significantly between the cognitive or sociality metrics used, taxonomy or testing conditions. Thus, support for the SIH is similar across studies using neuroanatomy and cognitive performance, those using broad categories of sociality, group size and social interactions, across taxonomic groups, and for tests conducted in captivity or the wild. Overall, our meta-analyses support the SIH as an evolutionary and developmental explanation for cognitive variation.
期刊介绍:
Biological Reviews is a scientific journal that covers a wide range of topics in the biological sciences. It publishes several review articles per issue, which are aimed at both non-specialist biologists and researchers in the field. The articles are scholarly and include extensive bibliographies. Authors are instructed to be aware of the diverse readership and write their articles accordingly.
The reviews in Biological Reviews serve as comprehensive introductions to specific fields, presenting the current state of the art and highlighting gaps in knowledge. Each article can be up to 20,000 words long and includes an abstract, a thorough introduction, and a statement of conclusions.
The journal focuses on publishing synthetic reviews, which are based on existing literature and address important biological questions. These reviews are interesting to a broad readership and are timely, often related to fast-moving fields or new discoveries. A key aspect of a synthetic review is that it goes beyond simply compiling information and instead analyzes the collected data to create a new theoretical or conceptual framework that can significantly impact the field.
Biological Reviews is abstracted and indexed in various databases, including Abstracts on Hygiene & Communicable Diseases, Academic Search, AgBiotech News & Information, AgBiotechNet, AGRICOLA Database, GeoRef, Global Health, SCOPUS, Weed Abstracts, and Reaction Citation Index, among others.