Explore the vast range of titles available.

Cultural evolution research is the study of how cultural traits (e.g., beliefs and behavioral patterns) stabilize, change and diffuse in populations, and why some cultural traits are more “attractive” (i.e., more likely to spread) than others. As such, cultural evolution is highly relevant for the emerging “science of science communication” (SSC) in that it can help organize and guide the study of science communication efforts aimed at spreading scientifically accurate information and inspiring behavioral change. Here, I synthesize insights and theory from cultural evolution with central findings and concepts within the SSC with the aim of highlighting the inherent, but underexplored, consilience between these two fields. I demonstrate how cultural evolution can serve as an unifying framework for the SSC and how, conversely, science communication can serve as a fertile testing ground for applying, exploring, and advancing cultural evolutionary theory in a real-world setting that matters. Lastly, I highlight merits and limitations of previous applications of cultural evolution to science communication and conclude with some particularly outstanding questions that emerge at the intersection between cultural evolution and science communication research.

A correction to this paper has been published: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-020-00672-y

Why are humans obsessed with divine minds? What do gods know and what do they care about? What happens to us and our relationships when gods are involved? Drawing from neuroscience, evolutionary, cultural, and applied anthropology, social psychology, religious studies, philosophy, technology, and cognitive and political sciences, The Minds of Gods probes these questions from a multitude of naturalistic perspectives. Each chapter offers brief intellectual histories of their topics, summarizes current cutting-edge questions in the field, and points to areas in need of attention from future researchers. Through an innovative theoretical framework that combines evolutionary and cognitive approaches to religion, this book brings together otherwise disparate literatures to focus on a topic that has comprised a lasting, central obsession of our species.

Some cultural evolutionary models predict that under stressful reductions of well-being, individuals will be more attracted and fastidiously adhere to traditional systems of norms that promote solidarity and cooperation. As religious systems can bolster human relationships with a variety of mechanisms, the material insecurity hypothesis of religion posits that individual religiosity will increase under conditions of material insecurity. The bulk of the literature up to this point has been correlational and cross-national. Here, across 14 field sites, we examine the causal role that educational attainment and food insecurity play in religiosity. We find that years of formal education and food insecurity do not consistently contribute to individual religiosity cross-culturally. We conclude with a discussion of some theoretical and methodological implications. As a general workflow for cross-cultural causal research in the quantitative social sciences, the present work is a modest but necessary first step in reliably estimating causation in the material insecurity hypothesis of religiosity.

People tend to evaluate information from reliable sources more favourably, but it is unclear exactly how perceivers’ worldviews interact with this source credibility effect. In a large and diverse cross-cultural sample (N = 10,195 from 24 countries), we presented participants with obscure, meaningless statements attributed to either a spiritual guru or a scientist. We found a robust global source credibility effect for scientific authorities, which we dub ‘the Einstein effect’: across all 24 countries and all levels of religiosity, scientists held greater authority than spiritual gurus. In addition, individual religiosity predicted a weaker relative preference for the statement from the scientist compared with the spiritual guru, and was more strongly associated with credibility judgements for the guru than the scientist. Independent data on explicit trust ratings across 143 countries mirrored our experimental findings. These findings suggest that irrespective of one’s religious worldview, across cultures science is a powerful and universal heuristic that signals the reliability of information.Across 24 countries, Hoogeveen et al. found that gobbledegook coming from a scientist was considered more credible than when coming from a spiritual guru. This ‘Einstein effect’ was less pronounced for religious individuals.

Psychological and cultural evolutionary accounts of human sociality propose that beliefs in punitive and monitoring gods that care about moral norms facilitate cooperation. While there is some evidence to suggest that belief in supernatural punishment and monitoring generally induce cooperative behaviour, the effect of a deity's explicitly postulated moral concerns on cooperation remains unclear. Here, we report a pre-registered set of analyses to assess whether perceiving a locally relevant deity as moralistic predicts cooperative play in two permutations of two economic games using data from up to 15 diverse field sites. Across games, results suggest that gods’ moral concerns do not play a direct, cross-culturally reliable role in motivating cooperative behaviour. The study contributes substantially to the current literature by testing a central hypothesis in the evolutionary and cognitive science of religion with a large and culturally diverse dataset using behavioural and ethnographically rich methods.

Social factors have been argued to be the main selection pressure for the evolution of large brains and complex behavior on the basis of data from mammals and birds. Coleoid cephalopods (octopuses, squid, and cuttlefish) have large brains, complex nervous systems and show signs of intelligent behavior comparable to that of birds, cetaceans, and primates. However, many cephalopods live largely solitary, semelparous, short lives, and many are cannibalistic, leaving little to no opportunity for parental care, complex group dynamics, or social learning. This suggests that the large brains found in cephalopods are not the result of social selection pressures. Here, motivated by the predictions of the \"Asocial Brain Hypothesis\" formal model, we compare the relationships between brain size and social, ecological, and other factors in cephalopods, predicting that ecological factors should be the primary selection pressure. Consistent with these predictions, we find that benthic (seafloor) habitats-arguably more complex environments than open-ocean (pelagic) habitats-are strongly associated with larger brain sizes, whereas measures of sociality are not, therefore suggesting ecology as a primary selection pressure on brain size in cephalopods. These results align with the \"Asocial Brain Hypothesis,\" which predicts that ecological complexity rather than sociality drives the evolution of large brains in asocial animals. Our findings challenge the long-standing emphasis on social drivers of brain expansion and show that ecological selection pressures can produce complex brains in highly divergent evolutionary lineages, which diverged from vertebrates over 500 million years ago. This result highlights the need for more general frameworks that capture different pathways to large brains and intelligence-both social and asocial-and underscores the power of modeling and comparative approaches to unify disparate findings in the study of brain evolution.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Footnotes* The paper has been updated to move more of the material to the SI to make it easier to read based on feedback.* https://cephdata.com

Extant coleoid cephalopods include over 800 species of octopuses, squid, and cuttlefish, which have drawn scientific and public interest for their complex behavior and cognition. Of these, approximately 10% (79) species have adult specimens with recorded measures of central nervous system size distributed across various sources. Here, we use a combination of topological placements from previous phylogenetic studies, along with mitochondrial and nuclear gene sequences obtained from GenBank, to build a composite phylogenetic tree with estimated branch lengths of all species with available brain measurements. This phylogeny is used for analyses in a forthcoming paper on cephalopod brain evolution, and ideally will be of use to other researchers interested in conducting comparative studies of coleoid cephalopod brains.