Brain Study Casts Doubt on Theory of How Human Intelligence Evolved

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Of all the characteristics that distinguish humans from other primates, those related to intelligence hold special interest for scholars and laypeople alike. It's an appropriate enough fascination. After all, what could be more uniquely human than the desire to understand how our big, curious, narcissistic brains evolved? That said, a lot of the story is entirely unknown, and the results of a new study suggest that some of what scientists thought they knew may actually require revision.

According to a popular view of human cognitive capabilities, much of what sets our species apart from the other primates can be attributed to a disproportionate enlargement of a part of the brain known as the frontal cortex that occurred at some point in human evolution. But the evidence traditionally used to support that argument, say Katerina Semendeferi of the University of California at San Diego and her colleagues, comes from small studies that in many cases did not include data from apes, our closest relatives. Furthermore, the studies varied in the way they defined the region of the cortex.

The team's own findings, detailed in the current issue of the journal Nature Neuroscience, led to a rather different conclusion. Using magnetic resonance imaging, the researchers obtained brain scans of 15 living great apes, four lesser apes, five monkeys and 10 humans¿a sample larger than any used in the previous studies, which looked at the brains of deceased individuals. They found that, in fact, "the human frontal cortex was as large as expected for a primate brain of human size." That is, the size of the human frontal cortex is, relatively speaking, comparable with¿not larger than¿that of the great ape frontal cortex.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


The investigators note that their results do not necessarily imply that the frontal cortex is less important in human cognitive specialization than previous studies have suggested, however. "The frontal cortices could support the outstanding cognitive capabilities of humans without undergoing a disproportionate overall increase in size," they write. It may be that reorganization allowed certain cortical areas to grow at the expense of others, thus maintaining the same overall size. Alternatively, the authors offer, modification of the brain circuitry may have led to richer interconnectivity between these cortical areas.

Kate Wong is an award-winning science writer and senior editor for features at Scientific American, where she has focused on evolution, ecology, anthropology, archaeology, paleontology and animal behavior. She is fascinated by human origins, which she has covered for nearly 30 years. Recently she has become obsessed with birds. Her reporting has taken her to caves in France and Croatia that Neandertals once called home to the shores of Kenya’s Lake Turkana in search of the oldest stone tools in the world, as well as to Madagascar on an expedition to unearth ancient mammals and dinosaurs, the icy waters of Antarctica, where humpback whales feast on krill, and a “Big Day” race around the state of Connecticut to find as many bird species as possible in 24 hours. Wong is co-author, with Donald Johanson, of Lucy’s Legacy: The Quest for Human Origins. She holds a bachelor of science degree in biological anthropology and zoology from the University of Michigan. Follow her on Bluesky @katewong.bsky.social

More by Kate Wong

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe