Study
Cultural conformity generates extremely stable traditions in bird song
Lachlan, Robert F.; Ratmann, Oliver; Nowicki, Stephen
Nature Communications, 2018
A large recorded corpus of wild swamp sparrow song was analysed by fitting competing models of cultural transmission — unbiased copying, copying with error, and conformist copying in which common variants are preferentially learned — and comparing how well each reproduced the observed distribution of song types.
- Studied in
- Melospiza georgiana
- Sample size
- large corpus of wild swamp sparrow songs fitted to cultural transmission models
The observed pattern was best explained by conformist learning, and the fitted models implied that some song types have persisted essentially unchanged for many hundreds of years.
What it means
The authors' reading, and ours. Where they differ, that difference is the point.
How the authors put it
Conformity in song learning stabilises traditions against copying error and drift, allowing extremely long-lived cultural variants.
How NatureHQ reads it
The counterweight to the sparrow sweep above, and the pair is the honest picture. Song culture can turn over a continent in twenty years and it can also hold a syllable steady for centuries, and the difference is not random — it depends on whether learners copy what they hear or copy what most others are doing. Conformity is a specific, testable bias rather than a general word for tradition, and this is a rare case of it being fitted to data rather than assumed.
- The centuries-long persistence is a model output, not an observation; it inherits every assumption in the transmission model.
- One species with a small, discrete repertoire, which is the easiest case for this kind of inference.
- Conformist copying is inferred from the distribution of variants rather than from watching individual birds choose.
What this study is used for on NatureHQ
One study can inform several subjects. Here is everywhere this one is cited.
Published by: Nature PortfolioPublished in a Nature Portfolio journal.
doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-04728-1
Checked against Crossref and OpenAlex on 2026-09-28, and they agree on the title, the authors and the year.
NatureHQ summarises research in its own words and does not reproduce published text. Reviewed 2026-09-02.