↓ Skip to main content

A Cultural Evolution Approach to Digital Media

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
45 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
40 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
141 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A Cultural Evolution Approach to Digital Media
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, December 2016
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2016.00636
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alberto Acerbi

Abstract

Digital media have today an enormous diffusion, and their influence on the behavior of a vast part of the human population can hardly be underestimated. In this review I propose that cultural evolution theory, including both a sophisticated view of human behavior and a methodological attitude to modeling and quantitative analysis, provides a useful framework to study the effects and the developments of media in the digital age. I will first give a general presentation of the cultural evolution framework, and I will then introduce this more specific research program with two illustrative topics. The first topic concerns how cultural transmission biases, that is, simple heuristics such as "copy prestigious individuals" or "copy the majority," operate in the novel context of digital media. The existence of transmission biases is generally justified with their adaptivity in small-scale societies. How do they operate in an environment where, for example, prestigious individuals possess not-relevant skills, or popularity is explicitly quantified and advertised? The second aspect relates to fidelity of cultural transmission. Digitally-mediated interactions support cheap and immediate high-fidelity transmission, in opposition, for example, to oral traditions. How does this change the content that is more likely to spread? Overall, I suggest the usefulness of a "long view" to our contemporary digital environment, contextualized in cognitive science and cultural evolution theory, and I discuss how this perspective could help us to understand what is genuinely new and what is not.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 45 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 141 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 140 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 19 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 11%
Student > Master 14 10%
Researcher 12 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 5%
Other 35 25%
Unknown 39 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 21 15%
Psychology 18 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 9%
Business, Management and Accounting 5 4%
Computer Science 5 4%
Other 32 23%
Unknown 47 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 31. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 June 2022.
All research outputs
#1,350,041
of 26,515,106 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#589
of 7,847 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,850
of 427,371 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#17
of 169 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,515,106 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,847 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 427,371 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 169 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.