var bibbase_data = {"data":"\"Loading..\"\n\n
\n\n \n\n \n\n \n \n\n \n\n \n \n\n \n\n \n
\n generated by\n \n \"bibbase.org\"\n\n \n
\n \n\n
\n\n \n\n\n
\n\n Excellent! Next you can\n create a new website with this list, or\n embed it in an existing web page by copying & pasting\n any of the following snippets.\n\n
\n JavaScript\n (easiest)\n
\n \n <script src=\"https://bibbase.org/show?bib=http://christophe.heintz.free.fr/Heintz.bib&jsonp=1&folding=0&theme=mila&owner=heintz,%20c&commas=true&showSearch=true&filter=keywords:cultural%20evolution&jsonp=1\"></script>\n \n
\n\n PHP\n
\n \n <?php\n $contents = file_get_contents(\"https://bibbase.org/show?bib=http://christophe.heintz.free.fr/Heintz.bib&jsonp=1&folding=0&theme=mila&owner=heintz,%20c&commas=true&showSearch=true&filter=keywords:cultural%20evolution\");\n print_r($contents);\n ?>\n \n
\n\n iFrame\n (not recommended)\n
\n \n <iframe src=\"https://bibbase.org/show?bib=http://christophe.heintz.free.fr/Heintz.bib&jsonp=1&folding=0&theme=mila&owner=heintz,%20c&commas=true&showSearch=true&filter=keywords:cultural%20evolution\"></iframe>\n \n
\n\n

\n For more details see the documention.\n

\n
\n
\n\n
\n\n This is a preview! To use this list on your own web site\n or create a new web site from it,\n create a free account. The file will be added\n and you will be able to edit it in the File Manager.\n We will show you instructions once you've created your account.\n
\n\n
\n\n

To the site owner:

\n\n

Action required! Mendeley is changing its\n API. In order to keep using Mendeley with BibBase past April\n 14th, you need to:\n

    \n
  1. renew the authorization for BibBase on Mendeley, and
    2. \n
  2. update the BibBase URL\n in your page the same way you did when you initially set up\n this page.\n
    3. \n
\n

\n\n

\n \n \n Fix it now\n

\n
\n\n
\n\n\n
\n \n \n
\n
\n  \n 2019\n \n \n (1)\n \n \n
\n
\n \n \n
\n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n Methods for studying cultural attraction.\n \n \n \n \n\n\n \n Heintz, C., Blancke, S., & Scott-Phillips, T.\n\n\n \n\n\n\n Evolutionary Anthropology: Issues, News, and Reviews, 28(1): 18-20. 2019.\n \n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n \n \n \"Methods pdf\n  \n \n\n \n \n doi\n  \n \n\n \n link\n  \n \n\n bibtex\n \n\n \n  \n \n abstract \n \n\n \n  \n \n 10 downloads\n \n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\n  \n \n \n \n \n\n\n\n
\n 
@article{heintz2019methods,\n\ttitle={Methods for studying cultural attraction},\n\tauthor={Heintz, Christophe and Blancke, Stefaan and Scott-Phillips, Thom},\n\tjournal={Evolutionary Anthropology: Issues, News, and Reviews},\n\tvolume={28},\n\tnumber={1},\n\tpages={18-20},\n\tyear={2019},\n\tpublisher={Wiley Online Library},\n\tdoi = {10.1002/evan.21764},\n\tkeywords = {cultural evolution},\n\tAbstract = {Cultural attraction theory (CAT) describes a general evolutionary process, cultural attraction, by which the spread and stability of cultural items (beliefs, practices, artifacts, etc.) result not just from differential reproduction, but also from transformations that systematically favor the reconstruction of cultural items of specific types. In this way, CAT aims to provide a general framework for the study of cultural evolution. In a thoughtful critical analysis, Buskell questions the ability of CAT to provide methodological guidance for research in cultural evolution. Can CAT be used to develop the sort of mid-range theories and models that often drive empirical work? Here we argue that CAT can indeed be used in this way, and we outline the methodological practices that students of cultural attraction have used and are currently developing.},\n\turl_pdf = {http://christophe.heintz.free.fr/papers/heintz-2019-methods.pdf}}\n
\n
\n\n\n
\n Cultural attraction theory (CAT) describes a general evolutionary process, cultural attraction, by which the spread and stability of cultural items (beliefs, practices, artifacts, etc.) result not just from differential reproduction, but also from transformations that systematically favor the reconstruction of cultural items of specific types. In this way, CAT aims to provide a general framework for the study of cultural evolution. In a thoughtful critical analysis, Buskell questions the ability of CAT to provide methodological guidance for research in cultural evolution. Can CAT be used to develop the sort of mid-range theories and models that often drive empirical work? Here we argue that CAT can indeed be used in this way, and we outline the methodological practices that students of cultural attraction have used and are currently developing.\n
\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n
\n\n
\n
\n  \n 2018\n \n \n (4)\n \n \n
\n
\n \n \n
\n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n Integration and the disunity of the social sciences.\n \n \n \n \n\n\n \n Heintz, C., Charbonneau, M., & Fogelman, J.\n\n\n \n\n\n\n In Nagatsu, M., & Ruzzene, A., editor(s), Philosophy and Interdisciplinary Social Science: A Dialogue. Bloomsbury, 2018.\n \n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n \n \n \"Integration pdf\n  \n \n\n \n\n \n link\n  \n \n\n bibtex\n \n\n \n  \n \n abstract \n \n\n \n  \n \n 4 downloads\n \n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\n  \n \n \n \n \n\n\n\n
\n 
@incollection{Heintz2018integration,\n\tauthor = {Heintz, Christophe and Charbonneau, Mathieu and Fogelman, Jay},\n\ttitle = {Integration and the disunity of the social sciences},\n\tbooktitle = {Philosophy and Interdisciplinary Social Science: A Dialogue},\n\tEditor = {Nagatsu, Michiru and Ruzzene, Attilia},\n\tpublisher = {Bloomsbury},\n\tyear = {2018},\n\tkeywords = {cultural evolution},\n\tAbstract = {We defend integrative pluralism: a view that recognises the utility of multiple approaches for understanding social phenomena, yet emphasizes the value of integrative research. Different fields of the social sciences rely on different methods and explanatory tools even when they study the very same phenomena. We illustrate this plurality of the social sciences with the studies of crowds. We show how three different takes on crowd phenomena (psychology, rational choice theory, and network theory) can complement one another. We conclude that social scientists are better described as researchers endowed with explanatory toolkits than specialists of some specific social domain. Social scientists' toolkits are adapted for identifying and specifying the role of specific causal factors among the multiple factors that produce social phenomena. These factors can be, in a non-exclusive way, economic incentives, psychological processes, the ecology or aspects of the social and cultural environment. The integrative research we advocate in this chapter are attempts to specify the role of such diverse causal factors.},\n\turl_pdf = {http://christophe.heintz.free.fr/papers/Heintz-Charbonneau-Fogelman-2018-integration.pdf}\n}\n\n\n
\n
\n\n\n
\n We defend integrative pluralism: a view that recognises the utility of multiple approaches for understanding social phenomena, yet emphasizes the value of integrative research. Different fields of the social sciences rely on different methods and explanatory tools even when they study the very same phenomena. We illustrate this plurality of the social sciences with the studies of crowds. We show how three different takes on crowd phenomena (psychology, rational choice theory, and network theory) can complement one another. We conclude that social scientists are better described as researchers endowed with explanatory toolkits than specialists of some specific social domain. Social scientists' toolkits are adapted for identifying and specifying the role of specific causal factors among the multiple factors that produce social phenomena. These factors can be, in a non-exclusive way, economic incentives, psychological processes, the ecology or aspects of the social and cultural environment. The integrative research we advocate in this chapter are attempts to specify the role of such diverse causal factors.\n
\n\n\n
\n\n\n
\n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n Four misunderstandings about cultural attraction.\n \n \n \n \n\n\n \n Scott-Phillips, T., Blancke, S., & Heintz, C.\n\n\n \n\n\n\n Evolutionary Anthropology, 27(4): 162–173. 2018.\n \n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n \n \n \"Four pdf\n  \n \n\n \n \n doi\n  \n \n\n \n link\n  \n \n\n bibtex\n \n\n \n  \n \n abstract \n \n\n \n  \n \n 4 downloads\n \n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\n  \n \n \n \n \n\n\n\n
\n 
@article{ScottPhillips2017misunderstandings,\n\tauthor = {Scott-Phillips, Thom and Blancke, Stefaan and Heintz, Christophe},\n\ttitle = {Four misunderstandings about cultural attraction},\n\tjournal={Evolutionary Anthropology},\n\tvolume={27},\n\tnumber={4},\n\tpages={162--173},\n\tyear={2018},\n\tpublisher={Wiley Online Library},\n\tdoi = {10.1002/evan.21716},\n\turl_pdf = {https://thomscottphillips.files.wordpress.com/2018/08/scott-phillips-et-al-2018-four-misunderstandings-about-cat.pdf},\n\tyear = {2018},\n\tkeywords={cultural evolution},\n\tabstract={Cultural attraction theory (CAT) is a research agenda the purpose of which is to develop causal explanations of cultural phenomena. CAT is also an evolutionary approach to culture, in the sense that it treats culture as a population of items of different types, with the frequency of tokens of those types changing over time. Now more than 20 years old, CAT has made many positive contributions, theoretical and empirical, to the naturalization of the social sciences. In consequence of this growing impact, CAT has, in recent years, been the subject of critical discussion. Here, we review and respond to these critiques. In so doing, we also provide a clear and concise introduction to CAT. We give clear characterizations of CAT's key theoretical notions, and we outline how these notions are derived from consideration of the natural character of cultural phenomena (Box 1). This naturalistic quality distinguishes CAT from other evolutionary approaches to culture.}\n}\n\n\n\n
\n
\n\n\n
\n Cultural attraction theory (CAT) is a research agenda the purpose of which is to develop causal explanations of cultural phenomena. CAT is also an evolutionary approach to culture, in the sense that it treats culture as a population of items of different types, with the frequency of tokens of those types changing over time. Now more than 20 years old, CAT has made many positive contributions, theoretical and empirical, to the naturalization of the social sciences. In consequence of this growing impact, CAT has, in recent years, been the subject of critical discussion. Here, we review and respond to these critiques. In so doing, we also provide a clear and concise introduction to CAT. We give clear characterizations of CAT's key theoretical notions, and we outline how these notions are derived from consideration of the natural character of cultural phenomena (Box 1). This naturalistic quality distinguishes CAT from other evolutionary approaches to culture.\n
\n\n\n
\n\n\n
\n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n Cultural attraction theory.\n \n \n \n \n\n\n \n Heintz, C.\n\n\n \n\n\n\n In Callan, H., editor(s), The International Encyclopedia of Anthropology. Wiley-Blackwell, 2018.\n \n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n \n \n \"Cultural pdf\n  \n \n\n \n \n doi\n  \n \n\n \n link\n  \n \n\n bibtex\n \n\n \n  \n \n abstract \n \n\n \n  \n \n 9 downloads\n \n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\n  \n \n \n \n \n\n\n\n
\n 
@incollection{Heintz2017encyclopedia,\n\tauthor = {Heintz, Christophe},\n\ttitle = {Cultural attraction theory},\n\tEditor = {Callan, Hilary},\n\tdoi = {10.1002/9781118924396},\n\tbooktitle={The International Encyclopedia of Anthropology},\n\turl_pdf = {http://christophe.heintz.free.fr/papers/Heintz2017-preprint-CulturalAttractionTheory.pdf},\n\tyear = {2018},\n\tpublisher = {Wiley-Blackwell},\n\tkeywords = {cultural evolution},\n\tabstract={Cultural Attraction Theory (CAT), also referred to as cultural epidemiology, is an evolutionary theory of culture. It provides conceptual tools and a theoretical framework for explaining why and how ideas, practices, artifacts and other cultural items spread and persist in a community and its habitat. It states that cultural phenomena result from psychological or ecological factors of attraction.}\n}\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n
\n\n\n
\n Cultural Attraction Theory (CAT), also referred to as cultural epidemiology, is an evolutionary theory of culture. It provides conceptual tools and a theoretical framework for explaining why and how ideas, practices, artifacts and other cultural items spread and persist in a community and its habitat. It states that cultural phenomena result from psychological or ecological factors of attraction.\n
\n\n\n
\n\n\n
\n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n Updating evolutionary epistemology.\n \n \n \n \n\n\n \n Heintz, C.\n\n\n \n\n\n\n In Soetaert, R., Blancke, S., & Rutten, K., editor(s), Perspectives on Science and Culture. Purdue University Press, 2018.\n \n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n \n \n \"Updating pdf\n  \n \n\n \n\n \n link\n  \n \n\n bibtex\n \n\n \n  \n \n abstract \n \n\n \n  \n \n 8 downloads\n \n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\n  \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\n\n\n
\n 
@incollection{heintz2018updating,\n\ttitle={Updating evolutionary epistemology},\n\tauthor={Heintz, Christophe},\n\tAbstract={\n\tChristophe Heintz argues that evolutionary epistemology is a theoretical framework for the study of science as a historical and cultural phenomenon. As spelled out by Campbell in the 70's, evolutionary epistemology has an ambitious goal: it aims at understanding the complex relations between biological evolution, especially biological evolution of human cognition, and the cultural evolution of scientific knowledge. It eventually aims at forming an integrated causal theory of the evolution of science, starting with the evolution of human cognition. In this chapter, the author considers Campbell's project and specify why it is still today a worthwhile project for explaining the evolution of science as a specific case of cultural evolution. But he also criticizes Campbell's evolutionary epistemology for assuming that blind variation and selective retention is the process through which science evolves. This assumption, the author argues, is at odd with much of what we know about scientific cognition and the history of science. He advocates: (1) dropping the methodological constraint of looking for processes of blind variation and selective retention at the expense of other constructive processes and mechanisms of knowledge production, but (2) retaining the integrative point of evolutionary epistemology, which implies taking seriously the results of evolutionary psychology and (3) retaining the populational framework for explaining the history of science, which means questioning why some scientific beliefs and practices eventually spread and stabilize in a scientific community. We end up with an updated research programme for evolutionary epistemology, which faces new challenges.},\n\tbooktitle={Perspectives on Science and Culture},\n\tEditor = {Soetaert, Ronald and Blancke, Stefaan and Rutten, Kris},\n\tyear={2018},\n\turl_pdf = {http://christophe.heintz.free.fr/papers/Heintz-2018-UpdatingEvolutionaryEpistemology.pdf},\n\tpublisher={Purdue University Press},\n\tkeywords={scientific cognition, cultural evolution}\n}\n\n\n\n
\n
\n\n\n
\n Christophe Heintz argues that evolutionary epistemology is a theoretical framework for the study of science as a historical and cultural phenomenon. As spelled out by Campbell in the 70's, evolutionary epistemology has an ambitious goal: it aims at understanding the complex relations between biological evolution, especially biological evolution of human cognition, and the cultural evolution of scientific knowledge. It eventually aims at forming an integrated causal theory of the evolution of science, starting with the evolution of human cognition. In this chapter, the author considers Campbell's project and specify why it is still today a worthwhile project for explaining the evolution of science as a specific case of cultural evolution. But he also criticizes Campbell's evolutionary epistemology for assuming that blind variation and selective retention is the process through which science evolves. This assumption, the author argues, is at odd with much of what we know about scientific cognition and the history of science. He advocates: (1) dropping the methodological constraint of looking for processes of blind variation and selective retention at the expense of other constructive processes and mechanisms of knowledge production, but (2) retaining the integrative point of evolutionary epistemology, which implies taking seriously the results of evolutionary psychology and (3) retaining the populational framework for explaining the history of science, which means questioning why some scientific beliefs and practices eventually spread and stabilize in a scientific community. We end up with an updated research programme for evolutionary epistemology, which faces new challenges.\n
\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n
\n\n
\n
\n  \n 2017\n \n \n (1)\n \n \n
\n
\n \n \n
\n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n The epidemiology of a mathematical representation: the `infinitesimal' at the end of the 17th century in France.\n \n \n \n \n\n\n \n Heintz, C.\n\n\n \n\n\n\n 2017.\n Working paper.\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n \n \n \"The pdf\n  \n \n\n \n\n \n link\n  \n \n\n bibtex\n \n\n \n\n \n  \n \n 1 download\n \n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\n  \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\n\n\n
\n 
@unpublished{Heintz2017infinitesimals,\n\tauthor = {Heintz, Christophe},\n\ttitle = {The epidemiology of a mathematical representation: the `infinitesimal' at the end of the 17th century in France},\n\turl_pdf = {http://christophe.heintz.free.fr/papers/EpidemioInfinite130821.pdf},\n\tyear = {2017},\n\tkeywords={scientific cognition, cultural evolution},\n\tnote = {Working paper.}\n}\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n
\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n
\n\n
\n
\n  \n 2014\n \n \n (2)\n \n \n
\n
\n \n \n
\n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n Current Darwinism in Social Science.\n \n \n \n \n\n\n \n Heintz, C., & Claidiere, N.\n\n\n \n\n\n\n In Handbook of Evolutionary Thinking in the Sciences, pages 781-807. Springer Netherlands, 2014.\n \n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n \n \n \"Current pdf\n  \n \n\n \n \n doi\n  \n \n\n \n link\n  \n \n\n bibtex\n \n\n \n  \n \n abstract \n \n\n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\n  \n \n \n \n \n\n\n\n
\n 
@incollection{heintz2014current,\n\ttitle={Current Darwinism in Social Science},\n\tauthor={Heintz, Christophe and Claidiere, Nicolas},\n\tAbstract={\n\tDarwinian theories concerned with human behaviour come in many\n\tforms. They can describe both the biological evolution of human cognition and the\n\tevolution of cultural traits in human communities. We briefly review these two\n\ttypes of Darwinian theories, including socio-biology, evolutionary psychology,\n\tmemetics and dual inheritance theory, and show how insights from both types can\n\tbe combined in a single framework: cultural epidemiology. We argue, however, that\n\tthis is profitable only if selectionists models of cultural evolution are replaced by an\n\tattractor model. },\n\tbooktitle={Handbook of Evolutionary Thinking in the Sciences},\n\tpages={781-807},\n\tyear={2014},\n\tdoi={10.1007/978-94-017-9014-7_37},\n\turl_pdf = {http://christophe.heintz.free.fr/papers/Heintz-Claidire-2014-Darwinism.pdf},\n\tpublisher={Springer Netherlands},\n\tkeywords={cultural evolution}\n}\n\n\n
\n
\n\n\n
\n Darwinian theories concerned with human behaviour come in many forms. They can describe both the biological evolution of human cognition and the evolution of cultural traits in human communities. We briefly review these two types of Darwinian theories, including socio-biology, evolutionary psychology, memetics and dual inheritance theory, and show how insights from both types can be combined in a single framework: cultural epidemiology. We argue, however, that this is profitable only if selectionists models of cultural evolution are replaced by an attractor model. \n
\n\n\n
\n\n\n
\n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n Scaffolding on Core Cognition.\n \n \n \n \n\n\n \n Heintz, C.\n\n\n \n\n\n\n In Caporael, L., Wimsatt, W. C., & Griesemer, J., editor(s), Developing Scaffolds in Evolution, Culture, and Cognition, pages 209-228. MIT Press, 2014.\n \n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n \n \n \"Scaffolding pdf\n  \n \n\n \n \n doi\n  \n \n\n \n link\n  \n \n\n bibtex\n \n\n \n  \n \n abstract \n \n\n \n  \n \n 2 downloads\n \n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\n  \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\n\n\n
\n 
@incollection{heintz2014scaffolding,\n\tAuthor = {Heintz, Christophe},\n\tAbstract={Cognitive flexibility can be achieved via a scaffolding process that harness the inferential power of core cognitive abilities.},\n\tBooktitle = {Developing Scaffolds in Evolution, Culture, and Cognition},\n\tEditor = {Caporael, Linnda and Wimsatt, William C. and Griesemer, James},\n\tKeywords = {cultural evolution, scientific cognition},\n\tPages = {209-228},\n\tPublisher = {MIT Press},\n\tTitle = {{Scaffolding on Core Cognition}},\n\tdoi = {https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9780262019552.003.0010},\n\tUrl_pdf = {http://christophe.heintz.free.fr/papers/Heintz-2013-Scaffolding.pdf},\n\tYear = {2014}}\n\n\n
\n
\n\n\n
\n Cognitive flexibility can be achieved via a scaffolding process that harness the inferential power of core cognitive abilities.\n
\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n
\n\n
\n
\n  \n 2013\n \n \n (2)\n \n \n
\n
\n \n \n
\n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n Essay review: Chrisomalis, S. 2010. Numerical notation.\n \n \n \n\n\n \n Heintz, C.\n\n\n \n\n\n\n Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 19(3): 664-666. September 2013.\n \n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n \n\n \n \n doi\n  \n \n\n \n link\n  \n \n\n bibtex\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\n  \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\n\n\n
\n 
@article{Heintz2013i,\n\tauthor = {Heintz, Christophe},\n\tdoi = {10.1111/1467-9655.12058_8},\n\tissn = {13590987},\n\tjournal = {Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute},\n\tmonth = sep,\n\tnumber = {3},\n\tpages = {664-666},\n\ttitle = {{Essay review: Chrisomalis, S. 2010. Numerical notation}},\n\tkeywords={cultural evolution, scientific cognition},\n\tvolume = {19},\n\tyear = {2013}}\n\n\n
\n
\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n
\n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n What can't be inferred from cross-cultural experimental games.\n \n \n \n \n\n\n \n Heintz, C.\n\n\n \n\n\n\n Current Anthropology, 54(2): 165-166. 2013.\n \n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n \n \n \"What pdf\n  \n \n\n \n\n \n link\n  \n \n\n bibtex\n \n\n \n  \n \n abstract \n \n\n \n  \n \n 6 downloads\n \n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\n  \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\n\n\n
\n 
@article{Heintz2013c,\n\tAbstract = {People from different cultures will interpret the experimental game they play differently; they will form different beliefs about what their partners will play and expect. I argue that the variations observed in experimental games ran across cultures might very much result from framing effects---cultural framing effects---rather than variations in pro-social preferences.},\n\tAuthor = {Heintz, Christophe},\n\turl_pdf = {http://christophe.heintz.free.fr/papers/Heintz-2017-cross-cultural experimental games.pdf},\n\tJournal = {Current Anthropology},\n\tKeywords = {cultural evolution, social preferences, economic cognition},\n\tNumber = {2},\n\tPages = {165-166},\n\tTitle = {{What can't be inferred from cross-cultural experimental games}},\n\tVolume = {54},\n\tYear = {2013}}\n\n
\n
\n\n\n
\n People from different cultures will interpret the experimental game they play differently; they will form different beliefs about what their partners will play and expect. I argue that the variations observed in experimental games ran across cultures might very much result from framing effects—cultural framing effects—rather than variations in pro-social preferences.\n
\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n
\n\n
\n
\n  \n 2011\n \n \n (4)\n \n \n
\n
\n \n \n
\n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n Les fondements psychiques et sociaux de la cognition distribu�e.\n \n \n \n \n\n\n \n Heintz, C.\n\n\n \n\n\n\n In Clement, F., & Kaufmann, L., editor(s), La sociologie cognitive. Paris: Maison des sciences de l'homme, 2011.\n \n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n \n \n \"Les pdf\n  \n \n\n \n\n \n link\n  \n \n\n bibtex\n \n\n \n  \n \n abstract \n \n\n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\n  \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\n\n\n
\n 
@incollection{Heintz2011a,\n\tAbstract = {{Apgrave;s avoir pr&eacute;sent&eacute; et expliqu&eacute; la notion de cognition distribu&eacute;e, je situerai l'analyse qu'elle permet au sein des sciences cognitives et de la sociologie. Mes buts sont de montrer en quoi la th&eacute;orie de la cognition distribu&eacute;e contribue aux th&eacute;ories de la psychologie et de la sociologie, et r&eacute;ciproquement comment les th&eacute;ories de la sociologie et de la psychologie peuvent &ecirc;tre recrut&eacute;es pour expliquer l'existence de syst&egrave;mes de cognition distribu&eacute;e. La troisi&egrave;me section de ce chapitre est centr&eacute;e sur les relations entre psychologie et th&eacute;orie de la cognition distribu&eacute;e. Elle montre que la sociologie de la cognition distribu&eacute;e b&eacute;n&eacute; &agrave; &ecirc;tre une sociologie cognitive de la cognition distribu&eacute;e. La quatri&egrave;me partie continue cet argument, mais en soulignant les ph&eacute;nom&egrave;nes typiquement sociologique qui interviennent dans la constitution et l'&eacute;volution des syst&egrave;mes de cognition distribu&egrave;e"}},\n\tAuthor = {Heintz, Christophe},\n\tBooktitle = {La sociologie cognitive},\n\tEditor = {Clement, Fabrice and Kaufmann, Laurence},\n\tKeywords = {cultural evolution, trust},\n\tPublisher = {Paris: Maison des sciences de l'homme},\n\turl_pdf={https://philpapers.org/archive/HEILFP.pdf},\n\tTitle = {{Les fondements psychiques et sociaux de la cognition distribu�e}},\n\tYear = {2011}}\n\n
\n
\n\n\n
\n Apgrave;s avoir présenté et expliqué la notion de cognition distribuée, je situerai l'analyse qu'elle permet au sein des sciences cognitives et de la sociologie. Mes buts sont de montrer en quoi la théorie de la cognition distribuée contribue aux théories de la psychologie et de la sociologie, et réciproquement comment les théories de la sociologie et de la psychologie peuvent être recrutées pour expliquer l'existence de systèmes de cognition distribuée. La troisième section de ce chapitre est centrée sur les relations entre psychologie et théorie de la cognition distribuée. Elle montre que la sociologie de la cognition distribuée béné à être une sociologie cognitive de la cognition distribuée. La quatrième partie continue cet argument, mais en soulignant les phénomènes typiquement sociologique qui interviennent dans la constitution et l'évolution des systèmes de cognition distribuèe\"\n
\n\n\n
\n\n\n
\n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n The Specificity of Human Communication Eludes Semiotic Theories.\n \n \n \n\n\n \n Morin, O., & Heintz, C.\n\n\n \n\n\n\n Current Anthropology, 52(5): 732-733. 2011.\n \n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n \n\n \n\n \n link\n  \n \n\n bibtex\n \n\n \n  \n \n abstract \n \n\n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\n  \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\n\n\n
\n 
@article{Morin2011,\n\tAbstract = {Naturalistic accounts of culture, based on evolutionary psychology and theories of cultural evolution, can deal with the meaning of public symbols. There have been, indeed, several interesting proposals to naturalize the study of signs and their meaning. Kockelman' paper---Biosemiosis, technocognition and sociogenesis---provides such a proposal. It draws on two theoretical traditions: the semiotic study of natural signs (Peirce 1868) and the selectionist account of signals proposed by Ruth Millikan (1984). We feel the pull of both approaches, but we fundamentally disagree with the way they account for human communication. We argue that Gricean theories of communication provide a better account of interpretation and communication.},\n\tAuthor = {Morin, Olivier and Heintz, Christophe},\n\tJournal = {Current Anthropology},\n\tKeywords = {cultural evolution, communication},\n\tNumber = {5},\n\tPages = {732-733},\n\tTitle = {{The Specificity of Human Communication Eludes Semiotic Theories}},\n\tVolume = {52},\n\tYear = {2011}}\n\n
\n
\n\n\n
\n Naturalistic accounts of culture, based on evolutionary psychology and theories of cultural evolution, can deal with the meaning of public symbols. There have been, indeed, several interesting proposals to naturalize the study of signs and their meaning. Kockelman' paper—Biosemiosis, technocognition and sociogenesis—provides such a proposal. It draws on two theoretical traditions: the semiotic study of natural signs (Peirce 1868) and the selectionist account of signals proposed by Ruth Millikan (1984). We feel the pull of both approaches, but we fundamentally disagree with the way they account for human communication. We argue that Gricean theories of communication provide a better account of interpretation and communication.\n
\n\n\n
\n\n\n
\n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n How Evolutionary is Evolutionary Economics?.\n \n \n \n\n\n \n Heintz, C., Callebaut, W., & Marengo, L.,\n editors.\n \n\n\n \n\n\n\n Biological Theory, Volume 6, Issue 4, 2011.\n \n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n \n\n \n\n \n link\n  \n \n\n bibtex\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\n  \n \n \n \n \n\n\n\n
\n 
@book{Heintz2011b,\n\tEditor = {Heintz, Christophe and Callebaut, Werner and Marengo, Luigi},\n\tKeywords = {cultural evolution},\n\tPages = {291-423},\n\tPublisher = {Biological Theory, Volume 6, Issue 4},\n\tTitle = {{How Evolutionary is Evolutionary Economics?}},\n\tYear = {2011}}\n\n
\n
\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n
\n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n Editorial: How Evolutionary is Evolutionary Economics?.\n \n \n \n\n\n \n Heintz, C., Callebaut, W., & Marengo, L.\n\n\n \n\n\n\n Biological Theory, 6(4): 291-292. 2011.\n \n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n \n\n \n \n doi\n  \n \n\n \n link\n  \n \n\n bibtex\n \n\n \n\n \n  \n \n 1 download\n \n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\n  \n \n \n \n \n\n\n\n
\n 
@article{Heintz2011c,\n\tAuthor = {Heintz, Christophe and Callebaut, Werner and Marengo, Luigi},\n\tDoi = {10.1007/s13752-013-0088-0},\n\tJournal = {Biological Theory},\n\tKeywords = {cultural evolution},\n\tNumber = {4},\n\tPages = {291-292},\n\tTitle = {{Editorial: How Evolutionary is Evolutionary Economics?}},\n\tVolume = {6},\n\tYear = {2011}}\n\n
\n
\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n
\n\n
\n
\n  \n 2010\n \n \n (2)\n \n \n
\n
\n \n \n
\n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n Experimental economics and the social embedding of economic behavior and cognition.\n \n \n \n\n\n \n Heintz, C., & Bardsley, N.,\n editors.\n \n\n\n \n\n\n\n Mind and Society 9 (2): Thematic issue, 2010.\n \n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n \n\n \n\n \n link\n  \n \n\n bibtex\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\n  \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\n\n\n
\n 
@book{Heintz2010f,\n\tEditor = {Heintz, Christophe and Bardsley, Nicholas},\n\tKeywords = {cultural evolution, economic cognition},\n\tPublisher = {Mind and Society 9 (2): Thematic issue},\n\tTitle = {{Experimental economics and the social embedding of economic behavior and cognition}},\n\tYear = {2010}}\n\n
\n
\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n
\n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n The implication of social cognition for experimental economics.\n \n \n \n\n\n \n Heintz, C., & Bardsley, N.\n\n\n \n\n\n\n Mind and Society, 9(2): 113-118. November 2010.\n \n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n \n\n \n \n doi\n  \n \n\n \n link\n  \n \n\n bibtex\n \n\n \n  \n \n abstract \n \n\n \n  \n \n 1 download\n \n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\n  \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\n\n\n
\n 
@article{Heintz2010d,\n\tAbstract = {Can human social cognitive processes and social motives be grasped by the methods of experimental economics? Experimental studies of strategic cognition and social preferences contribute to our understanding of the social aspects of economic decisions making. Yet, papers in this issue argue that the social aspects of decision-making introduce several difficulties for interpreting the results of economic experiments. In particular, the laboratory is itself a social context, and in many respects a rather distinctive one, which raises questions of external validity.},\n\tAuthor = {Heintz, Christophe and Bardsley, Nicholas},\n\tDoi = {10.1007/s11299-010-0082-1},\n\tIssn = {1593-7879},\n\tJournal = {Mind and Society},\n\tKeywords = {cultural evolution, economic cognition},\n\tMonth = nov,\n\tNumber = {2},\n\tPages = {113-118},\n\tPublisher = {Springer Berlin / Heidelberg},\n\tTitle = {{The implication of social cognition for experimental economics}},\n\tVolume = {9},\n\tYear = {2010}}\n\n
\n
\n\n\n
\n Can human social cognitive processes and social motives be grasped by the methods of experimental economics? Experimental studies of strategic cognition and social preferences contribute to our understanding of the social aspects of economic decisions making. Yet, papers in this issue argue that the social aspects of decision-making introduce several difficulties for interpreting the results of economic experiments. In particular, the laboratory is itself a social context, and in many respects a rather distinctive one, which raises questions of external validity.\n
\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n
\n\n
\n
\n  \n 2009\n \n \n (2)\n \n \n
\n
\n \n \n
\n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n Cognitive history and cultural epidemiology.\n \n \n \n \n\n\n \n Heintz, C.\n\n\n \n\n\n\n In Martin, L. H., & Sorensen, J., editor(s), Past Minds: Studies in Cognitive Historiography, 2. Equinox Press, London, 2009.\n \n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n \n \n \"Cognitive pdf\n  \n \n\n \n\n \n link\n  \n \n\n bibtex\n \n\n \n  \n \n abstract \n \n\n \n  \n \n 3 downloads\n \n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\n  \n \n \n \n \n\n\n\n
\n 
@incollection{Heintz2009,\n\tAbstract = {Cultural epidemiology is a theoretical framework that enables historical studies to be informed by cognitive science. It incorporates insights from evolutionary psychology (viz. cultural evolution is constrained by universal properties of the human cognitive apparatus that result from biological evolution) and from Darwinian models of cultural evolution (viz. population thinking: cultural phenomena are distributions of resembling items among a community and its habitat). Its research program includes the study of the multiple cognitive mechanisms that cause the distribution, on a cultural scale, of representations and material cultural items. By a detailed analysis of the social cognitive causal chain that occurred in the past, one can find out and specify which are the factors of attraction that account for cultural stability as well as historical cultural change. After reviewing recent research and developments in cognitive history, I present the concept of cultural attractor and explain why cultural attractors are historically variable. In doing so, I emphasize the role of historically constituted cognitive mechanisms, which account for much of historical cultural developments. I argue that the framework of cultural epidemiology can better account for these important historical phenomena than either evolutionary psychology accounts of culture or dual inheritance theory. I conclude that describing and explaining the history of cultural attractors is a good research goal for historians.},\n\tAddress = {London},\n\tAuthor = {Heintz, Christophe},\n\tBooktitle = {Past Minds: Studies in Cognitive Historiography},\n\tChapter = {2},\n\tEditor = {Martin, Luther H. and Sorensen, Jesper},\n\tKeywords = {cultural evolution},\n\tPublisher = {Equinox Press},\n\tTitle = {{Cognitive history and cultural epidemiology}},\n\turl_pdf = {http://christophe.heintz.free.fr/papers/Heintz - 2009 - Cognitive history and cultural epidemiology.pdf},\n\tYear = {2009}}\n\n
\n
\n\n\n
\n Cultural epidemiology is a theoretical framework that enables historical studies to be informed by cognitive science. It incorporates insights from evolutionary psychology (viz. cultural evolution is constrained by universal properties of the human cognitive apparatus that result from biological evolution) and from Darwinian models of cultural evolution (viz. population thinking: cultural phenomena are distributions of resembling items among a community and its habitat). Its research program includes the study of the multiple cognitive mechanisms that cause the distribution, on a cultural scale, of representations and material cultural items. By a detailed analysis of the social cognitive causal chain that occurred in the past, one can find out and specify which are the factors of attraction that account for cultural stability as well as historical cultural change. After reviewing recent research and developments in cognitive history, I present the concept of cultural attractor and explain why cultural attractors are historically variable. In doing so, I emphasize the role of historically constituted cognitive mechanisms, which account for much of historical cultural developments. I argue that the framework of cultural epidemiology can better account for these important historical phenomena than either evolutionary psychology accounts of culture or dual inheritance theory. I conclude that describing and explaining the history of cultural attractors is a good research goal for historians.\n
\n\n\n
\n\n\n
\n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n Darwinismes contemporains en sciences humaines.\n \n \n \n\n\n \n Heintz, C., & Claidiere, N.\n\n\n \n\n\n\n In Lecointre, G., Huneman, P., Machery, E., Silberstein, M., & Athane, F., editor(s), Les mondes darwiniens. Editions Syllepse, 2009.\n \n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n \n\n \n\n \n link\n  \n \n\n bibtex\n \n\n \n  \n \n abstract \n \n\n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\n  \n \n \n \n \n\n\n\n
\n 
@incollection{Heintz2009a,\n\tAbstract = {Nous pr&eacute;sentons les travaux en sciences sociales des derni&eacute;res cinquante ann&eacute;es qui se sont inspir&eacute;s des &eacute;tudes Darwiniennes sur l'&eacute;volution. Nous distinguons diff&eacute;rents types de Darwinisme en sciences sociales selon l'utilisation des notions Darwiniennes : le Darwinisme biologique est utilis&eacute; pour rendre compte des comportements humains et le Darwinisme universel est utilis\\'e pour rendre compte de l'&eacute;volution culturel le. Nous concluons sur une description de ce qui nous semble la meilleure exploitation du Darwinisme en sciences sociales, l'&eacute;pid&eacute;miologie culturelle.},\n\tAuthor = {Heintz, Christophe and Claidiere, Nicolas},\n\tBooktitle = {Les mondes darwiniens},\n\tEditor = {Lecointre, G. and Huneman, P. and Machery, E. and Silberstein, M. and Athane, F.},\n\tKeywords = {cultural evolution},\n\tPublisher = {Editions Syllepse},\n\tTitle = {{Darwinismes contemporains en sciences humaines}},\n\tYear = {2009}}\n\n
\n
\n\n\n
\n Nous présentons les travaux en sciences sociales des derniéres cinquante années qui se sont inspirés des études Darwiniennes sur l'évolution. Nous distinguons différents types de Darwinisme en sciences sociales selon l'utilisation des notions Darwiniennes : le Darwinisme biologique est utilisé pour rendre compte des comportements humains et le Darwinisme universel est utilisé pour rendre compte de l'évolution culturel le. Nous concluons sur une description de ce qui nous semble la meilleure exploitation du Darwinisme en sciences sociales, l'épidémiologie culturelle.\n
\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n
\n\n
\n
\n  \n 2007\n \n \n (2)\n \n \n
\n
\n \n \n
\n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n Institutions as Mechanisms of Cultural Evolution: Prospects of the Epidemiological Approach.\n \n \n \n\n\n \n Heintz, C.\n\n\n \n\n\n\n Biological Theory, 2(3): 244-249. August 2007.\n \n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n \n\n \n \n doi\n  \n \n\n \n link\n  \n \n\n bibtex\n \n\n \n  \n \n abstract \n \n\n \n  \n \n 1 download\n \n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\n  \n \n \n \n \n\n\n\n
\n 
@article{Heintz2007,\n\tAbstract = {Studying institutions as part of the research on cultural evolution prompts us to analyze one very important mechanism of cultural evolution: institutions do distribute cultural variants in the population. Also, it enables relating current research on cultural evolution to somemore traditional social sciences: institutions, often seen as macro-social entities, are analyzed in terms of their constitutive micro-phenomena. This article presents Sperber's characterization of institutions, and then gives some hints about the set of phenomena to which it applies. Culture evolves through the advent of cognitive causal chains, which span across individuals and their environment, and which distribute mental representations and public production in the population and its habitat. Institutions are characterized by the specific causal chains that distribute representations. These chains include representations that cause the recurrence of a series of events and thus regulate the distribution of a set of representations to which they themselves belong. Saying that some cultural phenomenon is an institution is, in this theoretical framework, explaining that some representations that are part of the cultural phenomenon cause it to endure. This technical characterization applies to what is usually understood as institutions, from marriage to money. It also opens the way for the analysis of complex phenomena in cultural evolution, such as themaintenance of cultural niches and the distribution of labor.},\n\tAuthor = {Heintz, Christophe},\n\tDoi = {10.1162/biot.2007.2.3.244},\n\tJournal = {Biological Theory},\n\tKeywords = {cultural evolution},\n\tLanguage = {en},\n\tMonth = aug,\n\tNumber = {3},\n\tPages = {244-249},\n\tPublisher = {MIT Press},\n\tTitle = {{Institutions as Mechanisms of Cultural Evolution: Prospects of the Epidemiological Approach}},\n\tpdf={https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1162/biot.2007.2.3.244.pdf},\n\tVolume = {2},\n\tYear = {2007}}\n\n
\n
\n\n\n
\n Studying institutions as part of the research on cultural evolution prompts us to analyze one very important mechanism of cultural evolution: institutions do distribute cultural variants in the population. Also, it enables relating current research on cultural evolution to somemore traditional social sciences: institutions, often seen as macro-social entities, are analyzed in terms of their constitutive micro-phenomena. This article presents Sperber's characterization of institutions, and then gives some hints about the set of phenomena to which it applies. Culture evolves through the advent of cognitive causal chains, which span across individuals and their environment, and which distribute mental representations and public production in the population and its habitat. Institutions are characterized by the specific causal chains that distribute representations. These chains include representations that cause the recurrence of a series of events and thus regulate the distribution of a set of representations to which they themselves belong. Saying that some cultural phenomenon is an institution is, in this theoretical framework, explaining that some representations that are part of the cultural phenomenon cause it to endure. This technical characterization applies to what is usually understood as institutions, from marriage to money. It also opens the way for the analysis of complex phenomena in cultural evolution, such as themaintenance of cultural niches and the distribution of labor.\n
\n\n\n
\n\n\n
\n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n Scientific cognition and cultural evolution: theoretical tools for integrating cognitive and social studies of science.\n \n \n \n \n\n\n \n Heintz, C.\n\n\n \n\n\n\n Ph.D. Thesis, Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales, June 2007.\n \n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n \n \n \"Scientific pdf\n  \n \n\n \n\n \n link\n  \n \n\n bibtex\n \n\n \n  \n \n abstract \n \n\n \n  \n \n 5 downloads\n \n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\n  \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\n\n\n
\n 
@phdthesis{Heintz2007a,\n\tAbstract = {The present work is a study in the historiography of science. Its goal is to provide some theoretical tools for studying the evolution of science as a social and cognitive phenomenon. It aims at showing that some concepts and frames of analysis drawn from cognitive anthropology are fruitful tools for the scientific study of science. The theories that I advocate using are the epidemiology of representation and the theory of distributed cognition. The added value of these theories stems in great part from their enabling to integrate results from cognitive and social studies of science.},\n\tAuthor = {Heintz, Christophe},\n\tKeywords = {scientific cognition, cultural evolution},\n\tMonth = jun,\n\tSchool = {Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales},\n\tTitle = {Scientific cognition and cultural evolution: theoretical tools for integrating cognitive and social studies of science},\n\tUrl_pdf = {https://theses.hal.science/tel-00145899v1/file/Heintz-thesis.pdf},\n\tYear = {2007}}\n\n
\n
\n\n\n
\n The present work is a study in the historiography of science. Its goal is to provide some theoretical tools for studying the evolution of science as a social and cognitive phenomenon. It aims at showing that some concepts and frames of analysis drawn from cognitive anthropology are fruitful tools for the scientific study of science. The theories that I advocate using are the epidemiology of representation and the theory of distributed cognition. The added value of these theories stems in great part from their enabling to integrate results from cognitive and social studies of science.\n
\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n
\n\n
\n
\n  \n 2003\n \n \n (1)\n \n \n
\n
\n \n \n
\n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n On Sousa's Epidemiological Approach.\n \n \n \n \n\n\n \n Heintz, C\n\n\n \n\n\n\n Journal of Cognition and Culture, 3(4): 322-328. 2003.\n \n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n \n \n \"On pdf\n  \n \n\n \n \n doi\n  \n \n\n \n link\n  \n \n\n bibtex\n \n\n \n\n \n  \n \n 1 download\n \n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\n  \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\n\n\n
\n 
@article{Heintz2003,\n\tAuthor = {Heintz, C},\n\tJournal = {Journal of Cognition and Culture},\n\tKeywords = {scientific cognition, cultural evolution},\n\tTitle = {{On Sousa's Epidemiological Approach}},\n\tnumber = {4},\n\tpages = {322-328},\n\tvolume = {3},\n\tdoi = {https://doi.org/10.1163/156853703771818064},\n\tUrl_pdf = {http://christophe.heintz.free.fr/papers/heintz_epidemioOfSc.pdf},\n\tYear = {2003}}\n\n\n\n\n
\n
\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n
\n\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n \n\n \n \n \n \n\n
\n"}; document.write(bibbase_data.data);