Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-rxg44 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-20T15:12:08.520Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The technical reasoning hypothesis does not rule out the potential key roles of imitation and working memory for CTC

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 August 2020

Alba Motes-Rodrigo
Affiliation:
Department of Early Prehistory and Quaternary Ecology, Eberhard Karls University of Tübingen, 72070Tübingen, Germany. albamotes7@gmail.comhttps://sites.google.com/view/alba-motes-rodrigo/homeelisa-bandini@hotmail.ithttps://sites.google.com/view/elisabandini/home
Eva Reindl
Affiliation:
School of Psychology and Neuroscience, University of St Andrews, St Mary's Quad, KY16 9JPSt Andrews, UK. eva.reindl@live.dehttp://www.evareindl.com/
Elisa Bandini
Affiliation:
Department of Early Prehistory and Quaternary Ecology, Eberhard Karls University of Tübingen, 72070Tübingen, Germany. albamotes7@gmail.comhttps://sites.google.com/view/alba-motes-rodrigo/homeelisa-bandini@hotmail.ithttps://sites.google.com/view/elisabandini/home

Abstract

To support their claim for technical reasoning skills rather than imitation as the key for cumulative technological culture (CTC), Osiurak and Reynaud argue that chimpanzees can imitate mechanical actions, but do not have CTC. They also state that an increase in working memory in human evolution could not have been a key driver of CTC. We discuss why we disagree with these claims.

Information

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable