ArticleHuman nature (Hawthorne, N.Y.)2014
The insectan apes.
Article in Human nature (Hawthorne, N.Y.), 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Social network position is a major predictor of ant behavior, microbiota composition, and brain gene expression.PLoS biology · 2023Article
- Major evolutionary transitions in individuality between humans and AI.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2023Review
- Human societal development: is it an evolutionary transition in individuality?Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2023Review
- The evolution of the human healthcare system and implications for understanding our responses to COVID-19.Evolution, medicine, and public health · 2022Review
- Developmental Dyslexia: Disorder or Specialization in Exploration?Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- A Note on Religion.Evolutionary psychology : an international journal of evolutionary approaches to psychology and behavior · 2021Article
- Shared sociogenetic basis of honey bee behavior and human risk for autism.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2017Article
- Suicide as a derangement of the self-sacrificial aspect of eusociality.Psychological review · 2016Review
- Eusociality: from the first foragers to the first states. Introduction to the special issue.Human nature (Hawthorne, N.Y.) · 2014Article
- Why what juveniles do matters in the evolution of cooperative breeding.Human nature (Hawthorne, N.Y.) · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
I present evidence that humans have evolved convergently to social insects with regard to a large suite of social, ecological, and reproductive phenotypes. Convergences between humans and social insects include: (1) groups with genetically and environmentally defined structures; (2) extensive divisions of labor; (3) specialization of a relatively restricted set of females for reproduction, with enhanced fertility; (4) extensive extramaternal care; (5) within-group food sharing; (6) generalized diets composed of high-nutrient-density food; (7) solicitous juveniles, but high rates of infanticide; (8) ecological dominance; (9) enhanced colonizing abilities; and (10) collective, cooperative decision-making. Most of these convergent phenotypic adaptations stem from reorganization of key life-history trade-offs due to behavioral, physiological, and life-historical specializations. Despite their extensive socioreproductive overlap with social insects, humans differ with regard to the central aspect of eusociality: reproductive division of labor. This difference may be underpinned by the high energetic costs of producing offspring with large brains.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24307448What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.