Human Nature

, Volume 28, Issue 1, pp 1–15 | Cite as

Cooperative Learning Groups and the Evolution of Human Adaptability

(Another Reason) Why Hermits Are Rare in Tonga and Elsewhere
Article
First Online:

Abstract

Understanding the prevalence of adaptive culture in part requires understanding the dynamics of learning. Here we explore the adaptive value of social learning in groups and how formal social groups function as effective mediums of information exchange. We discuss the education literature on Cooperative Learning Groups (CLGs), which outlines the potential of group learning for enhancing learning outcomes. Four qualities appear essential for CLGs to enhance learning: (1) extended conversations, (2) regular interactions, (3) gathering of experts, and (4) incentives for sharing knowledge. We analyze these four qualities within the context of a small-scale agricultural society using data we collected in 2010 and 2012. Through an analysis of surveys, interviews, and observations in the Tongan islands, we describe the role CLGs likely plays in facilitating individuals’ learning of adaptive information. Our analysis of group affiliation, membership, and topics of conversation suggest that the first three CLG qualities reflect conditions for adaptive learning in groups. We utilize ethnographic anecdotes to suggest the fourth quality is also conducive to adaptive group learning. Using an evolutionary model, we further explore the scope for CLGs outside the Tongan socioecological context. Model analysis shows that environmental volatility and migration rates among human groups mediate the scope for CLGs. We call for wider attention to how group structure facilitates learning in informal settings, which may be key to assessing the contribution of groups to the evolution of complex, adaptive culture.

Keywords

Cultural evolution Social learning Cultural transmission Complexity Cooperative learning groups Tonga 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgments

Bell was supported by the Department of Anthropology, University of Utah, and Hernandez was supported by an undergraduate research grant (UROP) from the University of Utah. Sandra Aguirre, Franklin Easter, Tevita Helu, Soane Vailea, Moleni Fonua, Vuti Fakatou, ’Alapaku Pasi, and Mele Finau were valuable field assistants. The manuscript was improved by comments from three anonymous reviewers.

References

  1. Artz, A. F., & Newman, C. M. (1990). Cooperative learning. Mathematics Teacher, 83, 448–449.Google Scholar
  2. Bellwood, P. (2014). First migrants: Ancient migration in global perspective: New York: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
  3. Boyd, R., & Richerson, P. J. (1985). Culture and the evolutionary process. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  4. Boyd, R., & Richerson, P. J. (1995). Why does culture increase human adaptability? Ethology and Sociobiology, 16(2), 125–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Castro, L., & Toro, M. A. (2014). Cumulative cultural evolution: the role of teaching. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 347, 74–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cavalli-Sforza, L. L., & Feldman, M. W. (1981). Cultural transmission and evolution: a quantitative approach. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Cohen, Elizabeth, G. (1994). Restructuring the classroom: conditions for productive small groups. Review of Educational Research, 64(1), 1–35.Google Scholar
  8. Csibra, G., & Gergely, G. (2011). Natural pedagogy as evolutionary adaptation. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, B: Biological Sciences, 366(1567), 1149–1157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Derex, M., Beugin, M.-P., Godelle, B., & Raymond, M. (2013). Experimental evidence for the influence of group size on cultural complexity. Nature, 503(7476), 389–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dow, G. K., Reed, C. G., & Woodcock, S. (2016). The economics of exogamous marriage in small-scale societies. Economic Inquiry, 54(4), 1805–1823.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Enquist, M., Eriksson, K., & Ghirlanda, S. (2007). Critical social learning: a solution to Rogers's paradox of nonadaptive culture. American Anthropologist, 109(4), 727–734.Google Scholar
  12. Fletcher, B. C. (1985). Group and individual learning of junior school children on a microcomputer-based task: social or cognitive facilitation? Educational Review, 37(3), 251–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gailey, C. W. (1987). Kinship to kingship. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
  14. Haslam, S. A. (2001). Psychology in organizations: The social identity approach. London: SAGE.Google Scholar
  15. Helu, F. (1993). Identity and change in Tongan society since European contact. Journal de la Société des Océanistes, 97, 184–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Henrich, J. (2004). Demography and cultural evolution: how adaptive cultural processes can produce maladaptive losses: the Tasmanian case. American Antiquity, 69(2), 197–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Johnson, A. W., & Earle, T. K. (2000). The evolution of human societies: From foraging group to agrarian state (2nd ed.). Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1974). Instructional goal structure: cooperative, competitive, or individualistic. Review of Educational Research, 44(2), 213–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ka’ili, T. (2005). Tauhi vā: nurturing Tongan sociospatial ties in Maui and beyond. The Contemporary Pacific, 17(1), 83–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kagan, S. (1985). Dimensions of cooperative classroom structures. In R. Slavin, S. Sharan, S. Kagan, R. Hertz-Lazarowitz, C. Webb, & R. Schmuck (Eds.), Learning to cooperate, cooperating to learn. New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
  21. Kempe, M., & Mesoudi, A. (2014). An experimental demonstration of the effect of group size on cultural accumulation. Evolution and Human Behavior, 35(4), 285–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kline, M. A., & Boyd, R. (2010). Population size predicts technological complexity in Oceania. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 277, 2559–2564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. MacDonald, D. H., & Hewlett, B. S. (1999). Reproductive interests and forager mobility. Current Anthropology, 40(4), 501–524.Google Scholar
  24. Martin, J. (1817). An account of the natives of the Tonga Islands in the South Pacific Ocean. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
  25. Mesoudi, A., Whiten, A., & Dunbar, R. (2006). A bias for social information in human cultural transmission. British Journal of Psychology, 97, 405–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Morton, H. (1996). Becoming Tongan: An ethnography of childhood. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.Google Scholar
  27. Muthukrishna, M., Shulman, B. W., Vasilescu, V., & Henrich, J. (2013). Sociality influences cultural complexity. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 281(1774).Google Scholar
  28. Rogers, A. R. (1988). Does biology constrain culture? American Anthropologist, 90(4), 819–831.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Rogoff, B., & Toma, C. (1997). Shared thinking: community and institutional variations. Discourse Processes, 23(3), 471–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Rumberger, R. W., & Thomas, S. L. (2000). The distribution of dropout and turnover rates among urban and suburban high schools. Sociology of Education, 73(1), 39–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Shaver, J. H., & Sosis, R. (2014). How does male ritual behavior vary across the lifespan? Human Nature, 25(1), 136–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Slavin, R. E. (1977). Classroom reward structure: an analytical and practical review. Review of Educational Research, 47(4), 633–650.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Slavin, R. E. (1980). Cooperative learning. Review of Educational Research, 50(2), 315–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Slavin, R. E. (1983). When does cooperative learning increase student achievement? Psychological Bulletin, 94(3), 429–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Slavin, R. E. (1985). An introduction to coooperative learning research. In R. Slavin, S. Sharan, S. Kagan, R. Hertz-Lazarowitz, C. Webb, & R. Schmuck (Eds.), Learning to cooperate, cooperating to learn (pp. 5–15). New York: Plenum Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Steward, J. (1949). Cultural causality and law: a trial formulation of the development of early civilizations. American Anthropologist, 51(1), 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Thaman, R. R. (1978). Co-operative yam gardens: adapting a traditional agricultural system to serve the needs of the developing Tongan market economy. In E. K. Fisk (Ed.), The adaptation of traditional agriculture: Socioeconomic problems of urbanization (pp. 116–128). Canberra: Australian National University, Development Studies Centre.Google Scholar
  38. Thaman, K. H. (2008). Nurturing relationships and honouring responsibilities: a Pacific perspective. International Review of Education / Internationale Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft / Revue Internationale de l’Education, 54(3/4), 459–473.Google Scholar
  39. Webb, N. M. (1991). Task-related verbal interaction and mathematics learning in small groups. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 22(5), 366–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Whitehouse, H. (2004). Modes of religiosity: A cognitive theory of religious transmission. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.Google Scholar
  41. Wittenbaum, G. M., Hollingshead, A. B., & Botero, I. C. (2004). From cooperative to motivated information sharing in groups: moving beyond the hidden profile paradigm. Communication Monographs, 71(3), 286–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Wittfogel, K. A. (1957). Oriental despotism: A comparative study of total power. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of AnthropologyUniversity of UtahSalt Lake CityUSA
  2. 2.Anthropology Programme, Social Sciences, Faculty of ArtsAucklandNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations