| Literature DB >> 29208949 |
Daniel Smith1,2, Philip Schlaepfer3, Katie Major4, Mark Dyble5,6, Abigail E Page7, James Thompson7, Nikhil Chaudhary7, Gul Deniz Salali7, Ruth Mace7,8, Leonora Astete9, Marilyn Ngales9, Lucio Vinicius7, Andrea Bamberg Migliano10.
Abstract
Storytelling is a human universal. From gathering around the camp-fire telling tales of ancestors to watching the latest television box-set, humans are inveterate producers and consumers of stories. Despite its ubiquity, little attention has been given to understanding the function and evolution of storytelling. Here we explore the impact of storytelling on hunter-gatherer cooperative behaviour and the individual-level fitness benefits to being a skilled storyteller. Stories told by the Agta, a Filipino hunter-gatherer population, convey messages relevant to coordinating behaviour in a foraging ecology, such as cooperation, sex equality and egalitarianism. These themes are present in narratives from other foraging societies. We also show that the presence of good storytellers is associated with increased cooperation. In return, skilled storytellers are preferred social partners and have greater reproductive success, providing a pathway by which group-beneficial behaviours, such as storytelling, can evolve via individual-level selection. We conclude that one of the adaptive functions of storytelling among hunter gatherers may be to organise cooperation.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29208949 PMCID: PMC5717173 DOI: 10.1038/s41467-017-02036-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nat Commun ISSN: 2041-1723 Impact factor: 14.919
Agta stories
| Story | Plot | Promoted social norms | Mechanism |
|---|---|---|---|
| The sun and the moon | There is a dispute between the sun (male) and the moon (female) to illuminate the sky. After a fight, where the moon proves to be as strong as the sun, they agree in sharing the duty —one during the day and the other during the night. | Sex equality, cooperation between the sexes | Calculation and comparison of payoffs to cooperation vs. competition |
| The wild pig and the seacow | Wild pig and seacow were best friends and always raced each other for fun. But the seacow injured his legs and could not run anymore. The wild pig was unhappy and carried the seacow to the sea. They could race each other again, pig on land and seacow in the sea. | Friendship, cooperation | Advantageous inequality aversion |
| The monkey and the giant | The monkey and his other animal friends would like to camp close to the river. However, there was a giant there who would attack whoever went close to the river. They went anyway, and had to take turns to look after the camping site during the night. The giant came and said to the monkey he was going to eat them. Together they plot a defence plan against the giant: the monkey tricked the giant into a cave where they had hidden bee and ant nests. The giant died. The monkey was the leader of the plan. His friends congratulated him, but reminded him that even though he was the smartest animal in the forest, he was still vulnerable, as the monkey-eating eagle could take him. | Cooperation, social equality | Reverse dominance hierarchy |
| The winged ant | An ant who had wings lived together with other ants. One day she said to herself: ʻI am not their friends because they don’t have wingsʼ. She went to bird and said, ʻYou must be my friend because you have wings.’ Bird said, ʻNo you are an ant and I am a birdʼ. Then she went to the wasp, mosquito and butterfly and they all said the same. Then she went back to an ant and said, ʻYou must be my friend even though you don’t have wings.’ The Ant said, ʻYes you are an ant and I am an ant’. So all the ants welcomed her and said, ʻAnt with wings, you are our queen’. | Social equality, group cohesion | Social acceptance, group identity |
The table shows four Agta stories, the main plot, promoted social norms and proposed mechanisms for norm compliance found in these stories
Fig. 1Association between cooperation and storytellers in camp. Results of the multi-level linear regression model, indicating an association between the average proportion of nominations for being a skilled storyteller in each camp and the amount given to others in the resource allocation game (b = −215.6, 95% CI: [−47.8; −383.4], p = 0.012). To facilitate interpretation, a higher value on the y-axis indicates a greater proportion of resources given to others (i.e. more cooperation). Residual values control for average camp relatedness, camp size and municipality (n = 290, camps = 18). For coefficients of the full model see Supplementary Table 3. Black points: camp averages; grey points: individual data points
Storytelling ability and camp-mate decisions
| Variable | Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Log-odds estimate | Odds ratio | Log-odds estimate | Odds ratio | Log-odds estimate | Odds ratio | |
| Storytelling reputation | 0.56 [0.4; 0.72]*** | 1.75 | 0.78 [0.58; 0.98]*** | 2.17 | 0.67 [0.47; 0.87]*** | 1.95 |
| Primary kin (ref. non-kin) | — | — | 0.74 [0.35; 1.13]*** | 2.09 | 0.7 [0.31; 1.09]*** | 2.02 |
| Distant kin (ref. non-kin) | — | — | 0.59 [0.3; 0.88]*** | 1.81 | 0.57 [0.28; 0.86]*** | 1.77 |
| Spouse’s primary kin/primary kin’s spouse (ref. non-kin) | — | — | 0.59 [0.24; 0.94]*** | 1.81 | 0.57 [0.22; 0.92]** | 1.77 |
| Spouse’s distant kin/other affines (ref. non-kin) | — | — | 0.25 [0; 0.5]* | 1.29 | 0.24 [−0.01; 0.49] | 1.27 |
| Spouse (ref. non-kin) | — | — | −0.25 [−0.98; 0.48] | 0.78 | −0.28 [−1.02; 0.46] | 0.76 |
| Reciprocity | — | — | 0.66 [0.46; 0.86]*** | 1.93 | 0.67 [0.47; 0.87]*** | 1.95 |
| Fishing reputation | — | — | — | — | 0.4 [0.13; 0.67]** | 1.5 |
| Hunting reputation | — | — | — | — | 0.24 [−0.03; 0.51] | 1.27 |
| Tuber gathering reputation | — | — | — | — | 0.27 [0; 0.54] | 1.31 |
| Medicinal knowledge reputation | — | — | — | — | 0.12 [−0.12; 0.36] | 1.12 |
| Camp influence reputation | — | — | — | — | 0.23 [−0.02; 0.48] | 1.26 |
| Intercept | −0.88 [−0.68; −1.08]*** | 0.92 [0.35; 1.49]** | 0.97 [0.38; 1.56]** | |||
| Distance, age, and sex controls | No | Yes | Yes | |||
Models assessing the likelihood of skilled storytellers being selected in a ‘camp-mate’ network, using a logistic GEE regression (n = 291, dyads = 6534). All models contain camp size as a control variable (not displayed). 95% confidence intervals are displayed in brackets. ˙ P<0.1, *P<0.05, **P<0.01, ***P<0.001
Fig. 2Reproductive success and storytelling ability. Results of the mixed-effects linear regression model, indicating that reproductive success, based on number of living offspring, was greater in skilled storytellers (n = 125) relative to less-skilled storytellers (n = 199; b = 0.53, 95% CI: [0.10; 0.96], p = 0.016). Residuals control for age, age-squared, sex and camp. Error bars represent 95% confidence intervals