Phylogenetic autocorrelation
problem of drawing inferences from cross-cultural data

Phylogenetic autocorrelation, also known as Galton's problem after Sir Francis Galton who described it, is the problem of drawing inferences from cross-cultural data, due to the statistical phenomenon now called autocorrelation. The problem is now recognized as a general one that applies to all nonexperimental studies and to some experimental designs as well. It is most simply described as the problem of external dependencies in making statistical estimates when the elements sampled are not statistically independent.
Asking two people in the same household whether they watch TV, for example, does not give you statistically independent answers. The sample size, n, for independent observations in this case is one, not two. Once proper adjustments are made that deal with external dependencies, then the axioms of probability theory concerning statistical independence will apply. These axioms are important for deriving measures of variance, for example, or tests of statistical significance.
Origin
In 1888, Galton was present when Sir Edward Tylor presented a paper at the Royal Anthropological Institute. Tylor had compiled information on institutions of marriage and descent for 350 cultures and examined the associations between these institutions and measures of societal complexity. Tylor interpreted his results as indications of a general evolutionary sequence, in which institutions change focus from the maternal line to the paternal line as societies become increasingly complex.
Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Phylogenetic autocorrelation” is problem of drawing inferences from cross-cultural data. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Phylogenetic, autocorrelation and problem, not as a finished interpretation.
Why this record matters
The phrase “problem of drawing inferences from cross-cultural data” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.
Named sources, stable identifiers and responsible institutions provide the strongest route from overview to verifiable evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Feb 12, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q5519373. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1888.
A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Phylogenetic autocorrelation”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Phylogenetic autocorrelation primary sources, Phylogenetic autocorrelation archive and Phylogenetic research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Phylogenetic autocorrelation”?
- What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Phylogenetic autocorrelation” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.