Element contents
Organic Progress and Evolutionary Theory
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 13 February 2026
Summary
Progress is defined as change towards the better. This definition, comprising both a descriptive and a normative element, can be applied in the organic domain to the history of living organisms. If evolutionary biologists struggle to live with organic progress, they also seem unable to live without it. Are there any theoretical arguments for using the normative terms 'good' and 'better' within evolutionary theory? How do we clarify the idea that some 'change towards the better' is conceptually implied by evolutionary theory? The author argues that there are specific kinds of value, that is, organic value, that allow us to speak meaningfully about improvements in living beings. A large part of this Element is devoted to showing how this applies to the concept of adaptation at a local scale. The final section broadens the investigation to a global scale, tentatively suggesting evolvability as a promising candidate for global progress.
Information
- Type
- Element
- Information
- Online ISBN: 9781108954501Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication: 31 March 2026
References
Alvarez, L. W., Alvarez, W., Asaro, F. and Michel, H. V. (1980). “Extraterrestrial cause for the cretaceous-tertiary extinction.” Science 208(4448): 1095–1108.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bich, L. (2024). “Organisational teleology 2.0: Grounding biological purposiveness in regulatory control.” Ratio 4: 327–340.Google Scholar
Bigelow, J. and Pargetter, R. (1987). “Functions.” Journal of Philosophy 84(4): 181–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blount, Z. D., Barrick, J. E., Davidson, C. J. and Lenski, R. E. (2012). “Genomic analysis of a key innovation in an experimental Escherichia coli population.” Nature 489: 513–518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonner, J. T. (1988). The evolution of complexity. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Bonnet, C. (1745). Traité d’insectologie ou Observations sur quelques espèces de vers d’eau douce, qui coupés par morceaux, deviennent autant d’animaux complets. Paris: Durand.Google Scholar
Bourrat, P., Deaven, K. and Villegas, C. (2024). “Evolvability: Filling the explanatory gap between adaptedness and the long-term mathematical conception of fitness.” Biology & Philosophy 39(4): 1–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brandon, R. (1990). Adaptation and environment. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Brown, R. L. (2014). “What evolvability really is.” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 65: 549–572.10.1093/bjps/axt014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burge, D. R. L., Edlund, M. B. and Frisch, D. (2018). “Paleolimnology and resurrection ecology: The future of reconstructing the past.” Evolutionary Applications 11(1): 42–59.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bury, J. B. (1920). The idea of progress: An inquiry into its origin and growth. London: McMillan & Co.Google Scholar
Butterworth, E. M., Rogers, T. and Wills, M. A. (2025). “Distinguishing passive and driven trait evolution in the presence of boundaries.” Methods in Ecology and Evolution 16: 2067–2081.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colin, A. and Neal, J. (2020). “Teleological notions in biology.” In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Zalta, E. N.. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2020/entries/teleology-biology/.Google Scholar
Crother, B. I. and Murray, C. M. (2019). “Early usage and meaning of evolvability.” Ecology and Evolution 9(7): 3784–3793.10.1002/ece3.5002CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cummins, R. (1975). “Functional analysis.” The Journal of Philosophy 72: 741–765.10.2307/2024640CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Darwin, C. R. (1859). On the origin of species by means of natural selection, or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life (1st ed.). London: John Murray.10.5962/bhl.title.82303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Darwin, C. R. (1860). On the origin of species by means of natural selection, or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life (2nd ed.). London: John Murray.Google Scholar
Darwin, C. R. (1861). On the origin of species by means of natural selection, or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life (3rd ed.). London: John Murray.Google Scholar
Darwin, C. R. (1866). On the origin of species by means of natural selection, or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life (4th ed.). London: John Murray.Google Scholar
Darwin, C. R. (1869). On the origin of species by means of natural selection, or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life (5th ed.). London: John Murray.Google Scholar
Dawkins, R. (1997). “Human chauvinism.” Evolution 51(3): 1015–1020.10.1111/j.1558-5646.1997.tb03686.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dawkins, R. and Krebs, J. R. (1979). “Arms races between and within species.” Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 205: 489–511.Google ScholarPubMed
De Cesare, S. (2019). “Disentangling organic and technological progress: An epistemological clarification introducing a key distinction between two levels of axiology.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Science 73: 44–53.10.1016/j.shpsc.2018.10.011CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
De Cesare, S. (2022). “Values in evolutionary biology: A comparison between the contemporary debate on organic progress and Canguilhem’s biological philosophy.” History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 44(22): 1–20.10.1007/s40656-022-00493-zCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
De Cesare, S. (2025). “The idea of progress within and beyond evolutionary theory,” PhD thesis, Archives ouvertes de l’Université de Genève. DOI: 10.13097/archive-ouverte/unige:188572.10.13097/archive-ouverte/unige:188572CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Desmond, H. (2021). “The selectionist rationale for evolutionary progress.” Biology & Philosophy 36: 32.10.1007/s10539-021-09806-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DiFrisco, J. and Ramsey, G. (2023). “Adaptationism and trait individuation.” Philosophy of Science 90: 1234–1243. DOI: 10.1017/psa.2023.28.10.1017/psa.2023.28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eldredge, N. and Gould, S. J. (1972). Punctuated equilibria: An alternative to phyletic gradualism. Models in Paleobiology. T. J. Schopf. San Francisco, Freeman, Cooper.Google Scholar
Fleming, L. and Brandon, R. (2015). “Why flying dogs are rare: A general theory of luck in evolutionary transitions.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Science 49: 24–31.10.1016/j.shpsc.2014.10.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gambarotto, A. and Nahas, A. (2022). “Teleology and the organism: Kant’s controversial legacy for contemporary biology.” Studies in History and Philosophy Science 93: 47–56.10.1016/j.shpsa.2022.02.005CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gayon, J. and Petit, V. (2018). La connaissance de la vie aujourd’hui. Toronto: ISTE editions Ltd.10.51926/ISTE.9781784054588CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ghiselin, M. T. (1994). “Darwin’s language may seem teleological, but his thinking is another matter.” Biology and Philosophy 9: 489–492.10.1007/BF00850377CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ginsborg, H. (2022). “Kant’s aesthetics and teleology.” In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Zalta, E. N. and Nodelman, U. (eds.). https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2022/entries/kant-aesthetics/.Google Scholar
Goudge, T. A. (1961). The ascent of life; a philosophical study of the theory of evolution. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Gould, S. J. (1982). The meaning of punctuated equilibrium and its role in validating a hierarchical approach to macroevolution. Perspectives on Evolution. R. Milkman. Sunderland, Mass, Sinauer.Google Scholar
Gould, S. J. (1985). “The paradox of the 1st Tier – An agenda for paleobiology.” Paleobiology 11(1): 2–12.10.1017/S0094837300011350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gould, S. J. (1989). “The wheel of fortune and the wedge of progress.” Natural History 98: 14–22.Google Scholar
Gould, S. J. (1996). Full house: The spread of excellence from Plato to Darwin. New York: Harmony Books.10.4159/harvard.9780674063396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gould, S. J. (2002). The structure of evolutionary theory. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Gould, S. J. and Eldredge, N. (1977). “Punctuated equilibria: The tempo and mode of evolution reconsidered.” Paleobiology 3: 115–151.10.1017/S0094837300005224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gould, S. J. and Lewontin, R. C. (1979). “The spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian paradigm: A critique of the adaptationist programme.” Proceedings of the Royal Society B London B Biological Science 205(1161): 581–598.Google Scholar
Grant, N. A., Magid, A. A., Franklin, J., Dufour, Y. and Lenski, R. E. (2021). “Changes in cell size and shape during 50,000 generations of experimental evolution with Escherichia coli.” Journal of Bacteriology 203: e00469-20.10.1128/JB.00469-20CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Greene, J. C. (1990). “The interaction of science and the world view in Sir Julian Huxley’s evolutionary biology.” Journal of the History of Biology 23: 39–55.10.1007/BF00158154CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hansen, T. F., Houle, D., Pavlicev, M. and Pélabon, C., Eds. (2023). Evolvability: A unifying concept in evolutionary biology? Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.10.7551/mitpress/14126.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huneman, P. (2017). “Macroevolution and microevolution: Issues of time scale in evolutionary biology.” In Time of nature and the nature of time: Philosophical perspectives of time in natural sciences. Huneman, P. and Bouton, C., eds., Dordrecht: Springer International Publishing, 315–358.Google Scholar
Kant, I. (1790 [2000]). Critique of the power of judgment (Kritik der Urteilskraft). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Knoll, A. H. and Bambach, R. K. (2000). “Directionality in the history of life: Diffusion from the left wall or repeated scaling of the right?” Paleobiology 26: 1–14.10.1017/S0094837300026865CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Korsgaard, C. (1983). “Two distinctions in goodness.” Philosophical Review 92(2): 169–195.10.2307/2184924CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lennox, J. G. (1993). “Darwin was a teleologist.” Biology and Philosophy 8: 409–421.10.1007/BF00857687CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lennox, J. G. (1995). “Health as an objective value.” The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 20(5): 499–511.10.1093/jmp/20.5.499CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lennox, J. G. and Kampourakis, K. (2013). “Biological teleology: The need for history.” In The philosophy of biology: A companion for educators. Kampourakis, K., ed., Dordrecht: Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht, 421–454.Google Scholar
Lenski, R. E. (2024). “The long-term evolutionary experiment.” from https://the-ltee.org/about/.Google Scholar
Lenski, R. E., Mongold, J. A., Sniegowski, P. D., Travisano, M., Vasi, F., Gerrish, P. J. and Schmidt, T. M. (1998). “Evolution of competitive fitness in experimental populations of: What makes one genotype a better competitor than another?” Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek International Journal of General and Molecular Microbiology 73(1): 35–47.10.1023/A:1000675521611CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lenski, R. E., Rose, M. R., Simpson, S. C. and Tadler, S. C. (1991). “Long-term experimental evolution in Escherichia coli. 1. Adaptation and divergence during 2,000 generations.” American Naturalist 138(6): 1315–1341.10.1086/285289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lenski, R. E. and Travisano, M. (1994). “Dynamics of adaptation and diversification – a 10,000-generation experiment with bacterial-populations.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 91(15): 6808–6814.Google ScholarPubMed
Lewontin, R. C. (1978). “Adaptation.” Scientific American 239(3): 212–218, 220, 222 passim.10.1038/scientificamerican0978-212CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marshall, D. J., Malerba, M., Lines, T., Sezmis, A. L., Hasan, C. M., Lenski, R. E. and McDonald, M. J. (2022). “Long-term experimental evolution decouples size and production costs in Escherichia coli.” PNAS 119(21): e2200713119.10.1073/pnas.2200713119CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Maynard Smith, J. and Szathmary, E. (1995). The major transitions in evolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
McShea, D. W. (1991). “Complexity and evolution: What everybody knows.” Biology & Philosophy 6: 303–324.10.1007/BF00132234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McShea, D. W. (1994). “Mechanisms of large-scale evolutionary trends.” Evolution 48(6): 1747–1763.10.1111/j.1558-5646.1994.tb02211.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McShea, D. W. (1996). “Perspective metazoan complexity and evolution: Is there a trend?” Evolution 50(2): 477–492.Google ScholarPubMed
McShea, D. W. (2011). “Evolutionary progress.” In Evolution: The first four billion years. Ruse, M. and Travis, J., eds., Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 550–557.Google Scholar
McShea, D. W. (2023). “Evolutionary trends and goal directedness.” Synthese 201(5): 178.10.1007/s11229-023-04164-9CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McShea, D. W. and Brandon, R. (2010). Biology’s first law. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226562278.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McShea, D. W. and Changizi, M. A. (2003). “Three puzzles in hierarchical evolution.” Integrative and Comparative Biology 43(1): 74–81.10.1093/icb/43.1.74CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meneganzin, A., Ramsey, G. and DiFrisco, J. (2024). “What is a trait? Lessons from the human chin.” Journal of Experimental Zoology Part B: Molecular and Developmental Evolution 342: 65–75. DOI: 10.1002/jez.b.23249.10.1002/jez.b.23249CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Méthot, P.-O. and Sholl, J., Eds. (2020). Vital norms: Canguilhem’s the normal and the pathological in the twentieth century. Paris: Hermann.Google Scholar
Mossio, M. and Bich, L. (2017). “What makes biological organization teleological?” Synthese 194: 1089–1114.10.1007/s11229-014-0594-zCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neander, K. (1991). “The teleological notion of function.” Australasian Journal of Philosophy 69(4): 454–468.10.1080/00048409112344881CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Orzack, S. H. (2009). “Testing adaptive hypotheses, optimality models, and adaptationism.” In The Oxford handbook of philosophy of biology. Ruse, M., ed., New York: Oxford Handbooks Online.Google Scholar
Orzack, S. H. and Sober, E. (1996). “How to formulate and test adaptationism.” The American Naturalist 148(1): 202–210.10.1086/285919CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ospovat, D. (1981). The development of Darwin’s theory: Natural history, natural theology, and natural selection, 1838–1859. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pence, C. H. and Ramsey, G. (2013). “A new foundation for the propensity interpretation of fitness.” The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 64: 851–881.10.1093/bjps/axs037CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pérez-Escobar, J. A. (2024). “Minimal logical teleology in artifacts and biology connects the two domains and frames mechanisms via epistemic circularity.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 104: 23–37.10.1016/j.shpsa.2024.02.001CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Radick, G. (2000). “Two explanations of evolutionary progress.” Biology and Philosophy 15: 475–491.10.1023/A:1006609532691CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ramsey, G. and Villegas, C. (2024). “Developmental channeling and evolutionary dappling.” Philosophy of Science 91: 869–886.10.1017/psa.2024.5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reutlinger, A., Schurz, G., Hüttemann, A. and Jaag, S. (2024). “Ceteris Paribus Laws”. In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Zalta, E. N. and Nodelman, U. (eds.). https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2024/entries/ceteris-paribus/.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, A. and Bouchard, F. (2023). “Fitness.” In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Zalta, E. N. and Nodelman, U. (eds.). https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2023/entries/fitness/.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, A. and McShea, D. (2008). Philosophy of biology: A contemporary introduction. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Rosslenbroich, B. (2006). “The notion of progress in evolutionary biology – The unresolved problem and an empirical suggestion.” Biology and Philosophy 21: 41–70.10.1007/s10539-005-0957-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosslenbroich, B. (2014). “On the origin of autonomy: A new look at the major transitions in evolution history.” In Philosophy and theory of the life sciences. Cham: Springer International Publishing: Imprint: Springer: 1 online resource (XII, 297 pages 261 illustrations).Google Scholar
Ruse, M. (1975). “Darwin’s debt to philosophy: An examination of the influence of the philosophical ideas of John F. W. Herschel and William Whewell on the development of Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 6(2): 159–181.10.1016/0039-3681(75)90019-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruse, M. (1996). Monad to man: The concept of progress in evolutionary biology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.10.4159/9780674042995CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rybczynski, N., Dawson, M. R. and Tedford, R. H. (2009). “A semi-aquatic Arctic mammalian carnivore from the Miocene epoch and origin of Pinnipedia.” Nature 458(7241): 1021–1024.10.1038/nature07985CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shanahan, T. (2004). The evolution of Darwinism: Selection, adaptation and progress in evolutionary biology. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Shanahan, T. (2017). “Selfish genes and lucky breaks: Richard Dawkins’ and Stephen Jay Gould’s divergent Darwinian agendas.” In The Darwinian tradition in context. Delisle, R. G., ed., Dordrecht: Springer International Publishing.Google Scholar
Sholl, J. (2020). “Plastic, variable and constructive: Renewing Canguilhem’s biological normativity.” In Vital norms: Canguilhem’s the normal and the pathological in the twentieth century. Méthot, P.-O. and Sholl, J., eds., Paris: Hermann, 255–294.Google Scholar
Simpson, G. G. (1960). “The history of life.” In Evolution after Darwin: The University of Chicago centennial: Vol. 1, Tax, S., ed., Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 117–180.Google Scholar
Simpson, G. G. (1974). “The concept of progress in organic evolution.” Social Research: An International Quarterly of the Social Sciences 41(1): 28–51.Google Scholar
Simpson, J. and Wiener, E. (1989). “Progress.” The Oxford english dictionary. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Stanley, S. M. (1973). “An explanation for Cope’s Rule.” Evolution 27(1): 1–26.10.1111/j.1558-5646.1973.tb05912.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stauffer, R. C. (1975). Charles Darwin’s Natural Selection; being the second part of his big species book written from 1856 to 1858. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Stowell, J. (2024). “On the sages of Konigsberg and Down: Rethinking Darwin’s relationship to Kant.” Journal of Victorian Culture 29(4): 510–529.10.1093/jvcult/vcae015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teufel, T. (2013). “The impossibility of a ‘Newton of the Blade of Grass’ in Kant’s Teleology.” In The life sciences in early modern philosophy. Smith, J. and Nachtomy, O., eds., New York: Oxford University Press: 47–61.Google Scholar
Valentine, J. W., Collins, A. G. and Meyer, C. P. (1994). “Morphological complexity increase in metazoans.” Paleobiology 20: 131–142.10.1017/S0094837300012641CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vasi, F., Travisano, M. and Lenski, R. E. (1994). “Long-term experimental evolution in Escherichia coli. II. Changes in life-history traits during adaptation to a seasonal environment.” The American Naturalist 144: 432–456.10.1086/285685CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vermeij, G. J. (1987). Evolution and escalation: An ecological history of life. Princeton: Princeton University Press.10.1515/9780691224244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vrba, E. S. and Lieberman, B. S. (2005). “Stephen Jay Gould on species selection: 30 years of insight.” Paleobiology Spring 31(2): 113–121.Google Scholar
Wagar, W. W. (1972). Good tidings; the belief in progress from Darwin to Marcuse. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Wagner, G. P. and Altenberg, L. (1996). “Perspective: Complex adaptations and the evolution of evolvability.” Evolution 50(3): 967–976.10.1111/j.1558-5646.1996.tb02339.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weider, L. J., Jeyasingh, P. D. and Frisch, D. (2018). “Evolutionary aspects of resurrection ecology: Progress, scope, and applications: An overview.” Evolutionary Applications 11(1): 3–10.10.1111/eva.12563CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiser, M. J., Ribeck, N. and Lenski, R. E. (2013). “Long-term dynamics of adaptation in asexual populations.” Nature 342(6164): 1364–1367.Google ScholarPubMed
Wouters, A. G. (2003). “Four notions of biological function.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Science 34: 633–668.10.1016/j.shpsc.2003.09.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, L. (1973). “Functions.” Philosophical Review 82(2): 139–168.10.2307/2183766CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, L. (1976). Teleological explanations. Berkeley: University of California Press.10.1525/9780520333697CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zimmerman, M. J. and Bradley, B. (2019). “Intrinsic vs. extrinsic value.” In The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy, Zalta, E. N. and Nodelman, U. (eds.). https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2025/entries/value-intrinsic-extrinsic/.Google Scholar
Accessibility standard: WCAG 2.0 A
Why this information is here
This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.Accessibility Information
The PDF of this Element
conforms to version 2.0 of the
Web Content Accessibility Guidelines
(WCAG), ensuring core accessibility principles are addressed and meets the basic
(A)
level of WCAG compliance, addressing essential accessibility barriers.
Content Navigation
Table of contents navigation
Allows you to navigate directly to chapters, sections, or non‐text items through a linked table of contents, reducing the need for extensive scrolling.
Allows you to navigate directly to chapters, sections, or non‐text items through a linked table of contents, reducing the need for extensive scrolling.
Reading Order & Textual Equivalents
Single logical reading order
You will encounter all content (including footnotes, captions, etc.) in a clear, sequential flow, making it easier to follow with assistive tools like screen readers.
You will encounter all content (including footnotes, captions, etc.) in a clear, sequential flow, making it easier to follow with assistive tools like screen readers.
Short alternative textual descriptions
You get concise descriptions (for images, charts, or media clips), ensuring you do not miss crucial information when visual or audio elements are not accessible.
You get concise descriptions (for images, charts, or media clips), ensuring you do not miss crucial information when visual or audio elements are not accessible.
Visual Accessibility
Use of high contrast between text and background colour
You benefit from high‐contrast text, which improves legibility if you have low vision or if you are reading in less‐than‐ideal lighting conditions.
You benefit from high‐contrast text, which improves legibility if you have low vision or if you are reading in less‐than‐ideal lighting conditions.
Structural and Technical Features
ARIA roles provided
You gain clarity from ARIA (Accessible Rich Internet Applications) roles and attributes, as they help assistive technologies interpret how each part of the content functions.
You gain clarity from ARIA (Accessible Rich Internet Applications) roles and attributes, as they help assistive technologies interpret how each part of the content functions.