Archaeology Dictionary:

adaptation
The ability of a biological organism to survive within a given environment by
changing its behaviour or physical attributes. Extended to include human
adaptation to the environment in which communities find themselves and
therefore a major explanatory tool in developing archaeological
understandings of periods of change.
Biology Q&A:

adaptation
What is an adaptation?
This term refers to how well an organism adapts to its environment. Adapted individuals survive
and reproduce better than individuals without those adaptations. An example of an adaptation
would be the long ears and limbs of rabbits living in desert-like conditions. These adaptations
allow the rabbits to radiate heat more efficiently over a large surface area, thus making it easier
to survive in a harsh climate.

Culture & Adaptation

The concept of "culture" has at least as many meanings as does "adaptation," so I want
to begin by laying out the definition I follow: Culture consists of socially acquired
information
By "information" I mean beliefs, values, ideas, knowledge, norms, etc.; by "socially
acquired," I mean transmitted from another person (directly, through imitation or
teaching, or indirectly via artifacts containing symbolic or iconic information, as in
writing, images, etc.); it therefore follows that novel ideas or beliefs are not part of
culture until they are socially transmitted
Note that by this "ideational" definition, behavior, artifacts, and the like are not culture
per se, though these may be heavily informed or shaped by cultural information
This definitional move may seem counterintuitive, or even perverse, but it can be
justified as follows:

1) culture as information ("memes", etc.) is analogous to genetically-inherited

information ("genes");
2) artifacts and culturally-informed behavior represent the phenotypic expression of
cultural information (in a manner analogous to the phenotypic expression of genes) -- in
fact, behavior is an aspect of phenotype, and artifacts can be thought of as "extended
phenotypes" (like beaver dams, beehives, bird nests, etc.);
3) behavior and artifacts are never purely cultural, since they also shaped by a) genetic
information, and b) physical constraints (physics, chemistry, etc.)
Following this definitional detour, let's turn to the central question: Can we analyze
culture using the adaptationist logic of evolutionary biology?
Culture presents something of paradox for Darwinian theory:
On one hand, we know that cultural variation (variation in socially acquired beliefs and
preferences) is due to social learning, and not genetic variation
On the other hand, the capacity for cultural transmission is a biologically evolved
attribute of our species, and in fact requires complex biological structures (brain
mechanisms, vocal structures, delayed maturation, etc.) that must almost certainly be
products of evolution by natural selection; fundamental principles of biological evolution
imply that these structures (the "capacity for culture") would only have evolved and be
maintained by natural selection if they are used in ways that on average enhanced the
fitness of their bearers
So while specific cultural variation is not caused by genetic variation, the capacity for
culture is genetically evolved by natural selection; thus we have grounds to predict that
cultural variation serves fitness-enhancing ends on average
(If this sounds rather like discussion in the previous lecture of phenotypic adaptation as
being ultimately a product of genetic evolution, that's exactly what I intend)
While the logic of natural selection and the evidence of human evolution (relatively rapid
and steady selection for larger brains and mechanisms for symbolic communication,
etc.) strongly suggest that cultural variation is adaptive, we need some additional theory
to tell us how this might work--to fill in the mysterious processes of "ecological
adaptation" alluded to by Steward, Rappaport, and other ecol. anthros

Recent work suggests two pathways by which cultural variation may lead to adaptive
behavior (hence, offers two complementary frameworks for integrating Darwinian and
cultural views of human behavior):
1) via genetically evolved preferences and learning biases
2) via natural selection acting on cultural (rather than genetic) variation
The remainder of this lecture explores these two mechanisms of cultural adaptation (in
the process taking us beyond ecological anthropology per se)
Cultural orientation is the degree of association between a
document and a community in a polarized field of discourse.
As an example, this paper presents a method for estimating
the orientation of Web documents about politicsthe extent
to which these documents participate in left- or right-wing
ideologies. Additionally, the method is used to discriminate
between musical artists home pages with respect to their
mainstream and alternative appeal.

Being able to associate or adjust to a particular culture. When someone can relate or become
familiar and comfortable with a specific way of life, beliefs, rituals, customs. That's my best
guess.
Cultural orientation, ethnic affiliation, and negative daily occurrences, A multidimensional crosscultural analysis
If western Deaf culture is considered collectivist, then it is only natural that research on
individualist and collectivist cultures would apply to western Deaf culture. Ben-Ari & Lavee
(2004) studied the impact affiliation with either an individualistic culture or a collectivist culture
had on stress perception. Cultural impact on stress perception is critical because stress negatively
affects both mental and physical health (Ben-Ari & Lavee, 2004). That members of the Deaf
community are collectivists means that Deaf people may understand and suffer stress differently
than the greater hearing community. Understanding how Deaf people react to stress would be a
critical step towards treating stress-related problems.
Stress sources differ across cultures. Individualist cultures tend to have self-originating stress
whereas collectivist cultures have collectively originating stress (Ben-Ari & Lavee, 2004). That
is not to say that members of the collective community lack an idea of self. Rather, the
collectivist perception of self originates from the collectivist individuals role in the community
and whether or not that role is meaningful (Ben-Ari & Lavee, 2004). The collectivist individual
thinks of himself or herself as a part of the community and all his or her goals and desires are a
reflection of the community needs (Ben-Ari & Lavee, 2004). Deaf members of the community
place a lot of emphasis on their role in the Deaf community. Deaf community members who do
not have a positive experience in the Deaf community may suffer higher degrees of self-doubt,

stress, and lack of actualization than the Deaf who derive a positive community experience. The
lack of actualization is critical in understanding the mental health of Deaf members who are not
involved or who do not have a positive involvement with the Deaf community. Collectivist
cultures encourage actualization through the collective culture (Ben-Ari & Lavee, 2004). If an
individual cannot actualize because of negative community involvement, then the individuals
self-esteem will suffer terribly.
Ben-Ari & Lavee (2004) recognize that creating two broad labels for all cultures is rather
complicated. Not all collectivist cultures approach the community in the same way and not all
individualist cultures approach the self in the same way. Some cultures share traits with both
individualist and collectivist cultures. There currently is some friction in the Deaf community
about whether or not the community is truly collectivist since there are a lot of individualist
elements present. Certainly members of the Deaf community have leeched elements of the
greater western culture in which it exists; however, an argument can be made that truly
individualistic Deaf people are in the pre-encounter stage and are suffering from the effects of
colonialism (Parham & Helms, 1985).
What Ben-Ari & Lavee (2004) found was that individualist and collectivist cultures do process
stress differently, although not to much of a degree. Certain stress sources, such as financial and
social-environmental were nearly identical across cultures (Ben-Ari & Lavee, 2004). One major
difference is that one set of collectivists reported that family was a major source of stress (BenAri & Lavee, 2004). It may be that members of the collectivist community feel pressure to meet
their familys needs and expectations and that these stresses are not that potent in an individualist
culture. The Deaf community can be seen as a Deaf persons family. Pressure to find a place in
the Deaf community or to meet the expectations of local Deaf community members and greater
Deaf community leaders may place a lot of stress on Deaf individuals.
Ben-Ari, A. & Lavee, Y. (2004). Cultural orientation, ethnic affiliation, and negative daily
occurrences, A multidimensional cross-cultural analysis. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry.
74(2). 102-111. Retrieved September 15, 2006 from psycARTICLES database.
Parham & Helms (1985) Relation of racial identity attitudes to self-actualization and affective
states of black students. Journal of Counseling Psychology. 32(3) 431-440. Retrieved September
15, 2006 from psycARTICLES database.