Chapter 2: Dunbar, R.I.M Brain and cognition in evolutionary perspective (pp.

21-46)

Social brain hypothesis: Argues that the evolution of the

human brain is largely due to social cognitive factors in
other words, human brains evolved as social brains.
Brains are metabolically expensive tissue; largely owing to
the difficulty in creating and replenishing neurotransmitter
supplies.
Evolving a large brain must mean that brain size offered an
important fitness advantage, otherwise its hard to see why it
would happen.
 Social Brain Hypothesis
Jerisons encephalization quotient (EQ): how much brain is
left over after we scale its size against body size?
EQ for humans is around 7, for chimpanzees it is around 3-4. A
disproportionate increase in brain size in humans is attributable
to increases in the frontal lobe. Controversy over whether
human frontal lobes are larger than would be expected for a
primate of our size. Dunbar says yes.
 Social Brain Hypothesis
Evo-devo of brain evolution: simple process
extend the ontogenetic time period for
neurogenesis. In other words, delay the stop
making (precursor) brain cells genetic signal.
May help explain long developmental period for
humans.
Selection for large brains
Ecological vs. Social brain hypotheses
Ecological: increased demands of hunting meat
or selecting ripe fruit
Social: increased demands of living in complex
social systems.
 Social Brain Hypothesis
Dunbar argues that social brain
hypo more strongly supported
since most of primate brain
expansion is in the neocortex
which is where social
computational processes would
be taking place as opposed to
sub-cortical structures where
more ecological processing such
as cognitive mapping would be
taking place.
Reader and LaLand (2002)
hypo that expanded neo cortex
is for more sophisticated social
learning. Neocortex size and
innovation related in primates.
Social Brain Hypothesis
Critical social cognition process:
Theory of Mind
Transition to second-order intentionality
4 to 5 years of age; I know that you
know that.
TOM in other species
Dolphins appear not to have TOM
Monkeys and nonprimates probably not
Great apes, some capacity, may
understand intentional vs. accidental
actions, may understand goal and
desires, but not evidence of
understanding beliefs, theories; more
complex mental states.
 Social Brain Hypothesis
Some evidence that mentalizing tasks are computationally
demanding.
Possibility that spindle cells (unique to great apes) may be
important for social computation. High density in ACC;
Connects ACC (working memory; self regulation) with
amygdala (emotional processing). Spindle cell
development tracks self-control development in children.
 Social Brain Hypothesis
Total brain volume and TOM; as brain grows larger more
diverse processing units can be integrated and directed to
one task.
Summary:
Great ape social groups appear to be more complex than Old
world monkey groups (even though OWM groups can often
be just as larger if not larger in number)
Important transition in brain evolution appears to have taken
place after split of OWM (23mybp) but before the branching
off of the lesser apes (16mybp).
Possibility that this had to do with a genetic mutation that
allowed for faster neuronal transmission times.
Possibility of fission-fusion social system being significant.
Apes must disperse more widely because they cannot
processes unripe fruits.