<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">

<p>Two potential forms of mutation in cultural evolution have been identified: ‘copying error’, where learners make random modifications to a behaviour and ‘guided variation’ where learners makes non-random modifications. While copying error is directly analogous to genetic mutation, guided variation is a specifically cultural process that does not have a close parallel in biological evolution. It has been suggested that the decision-making processes underlying intentional guided variation may produce similar results to cultural transmission as both are likely to be influenced by cognitive biases. This study uses a unique linear transmission chain design, without any influence of recall, to examine intentional guided variation. Participants were asked to alter news stories however they wished in order to make them more interesting, the product of their modification was then passed to the next participant and so on down the chain. The products of the chains were then compared with the original material so as to assess any underlying biases in the changed content. Through this process of guided variation, original material which scored low for bias-exploiting content significantly increased in at least one known content bias, whereas original material which scored high for bias-exploiting content was not significantly altered in this respect.</p></abstract>

Two potential forms of mutation in cultural evolution have been identified: ‘copying error’, where learners make random modifications to a behaviour and ‘guided variation’ where learners makes non-random modifications. While copying error is directly analogous to genetic mutation, guided variation is a specifically cultural process that does not have a close parallel in biological evolution. It has been suggested that the decision-making processes underlying intentional guided variation may produce similar results to cultural transmission as both are likely to be influenced by cognitive biases. This study uses a unique linear transmission chain design, without any influence of recall, to examine intentional guided variation. Participants were asked to alter news stories however they wished in order to make them more interesting, the product of their modification was then passed to the next participant and so on down the chain. The products of the chains were then compared with the original material so as to assess any underlying biases in the changed content. Through this process of guided variation, original material which scored low for bias-exploiting content significantly increased in at least one known content bias, whereas original material which scored high for bias-exploiting content was not significantly altered in this respect.

Faking the News: Intentional Guided Variation Reflects Cognitive Biases in Transmission Chains Without Recall

Cultural Science

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Two potential forms of mutation in cultural evolution have been identified: ‘copying error’, where learners make random modifications to a behaviour and...

Addition/Change	Frequency in each story (% of stories)				Frequency in all stories (%)
Addition/Change	Low-Trees	Low-Bridge	High-Pea	High-Tiger	Frequency in all stories (%)
MCI content	50	40	80	40	52.5
Amusing content	60	60	50	60	57.5
Exaggeration	40	50	60	60	52.5
‘Pop culture’	20	40	20	40	30
Location change	20	10	0	10	10

Story	Mean (SD)
Story	Emotional	Plausibility	Relevance	Survival	Social	Stereotype
Trees	3.73(1.35)	6(1.1)	2.82(1.25)	2.73(1.62)	1.82(1.08)	1.36(.67)
Bridge	3.36(1.57)	4.91(1.87)	1.91(1.45)	1.91(1.22)	2.36(1.03)	1.91(.83)
Pea	5.55(.82)	2.82(2.04)	2.36(1.63)	4.55(1.29)	2.91(1.14)	1.91(.7)
Tiger	5.36(.67)	3.82(1.6)	1.64(.92)	3.55(1.44)	2.45(1.57)	3.09(1.38)

Story	Mean (SD)
Story	Emotional	Plausibility	Relevance	Survival	Social	Stereotype
Trees	4.18(1.38)	2.77(1.85)	2.18(1.24)	3.09(1.81)	2.51(1.45)	2.09(1.56)
Bridge	4.21(1.59)	2.89(1.83)	1.91(1.18)	2.45(1.48)	3.56(1.63)	2.39(1.59)
Pea	4.76(1.6)	1.94(1.48)	1.54(.99)	3.59(2.04)	2.66(1.7)	2.14(1.54)
Tiger	4.54(1.45)	2.20(1.57)	1.48(.77)	2.82(1.7)	2.77(1.52)	2.78(1.73)

Faking the News: Intentional Guided Variation Reflects Cognitive Biases in Transmission Chains Without Recall

Article Category: Research

Publicado en línea: 10 jul 2018

Páginas: 54 - 65

Recibido: 28 may 2018

Aceptado: 30 ago 2018

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/csci.109

Palabras clave
cultural evolution, cultural transmission, cognitive biases, fake news

© 2018 Joseph Stubbersfield, Jamshid Tehrani and Emma Flynn, published by De Gruyter

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Results of the qualitative analysis. The table shows the percentage frequency common additions or changes made to the stories.

Means and standard deviations of rating scores for each news story before transmission.

Means and standard deviations of rating scores for each news story after transmission.

Faking the News: Intentional Guided Variation Reflects Cognitive Biases in Transmission Chains Without Recall

Article Category: Research

Publicado en línea: 10 jul 2018

Páginas: 54 - 65

Recibido: 28 may 2018

Aceptado: 30 ago 2018

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/csci.109

Palabras clavecultural evolution, cultural transmission, cognitive biases, fake news

© 2018 Joseph Stubbersfield, Jamshid Tehrani and Emma Flynn, published by De Gruyter

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Results of the qualitative analysis. The table shows the percentage frequency common additions or changes made to the stories.

Means and standard deviations of rating scores for each news story before transmission.

Means and standard deviations of rating scores for each news story after transmission.

Palabras clave
cultural evolution, cultural transmission, cognitive biases, fake news