This article stresses the use of multivariate analysis to study the emergence of states. The authors first discuss how social inequality, population density, and trade affect state development. Next, they turn to a time series regression to formally examine social stratification, urbanization, technological specialization as predictors of political integration. Finally, economic vulnerability and scalar stress are considered as possible underlying factors in the emergence of states.

This article aims to answer the question: Does the imagery of composite beings, also known as monsters, appear cross-culturally? The authors use the Standard Cross-Cultural Sample to test whether these mythical figures are universal and which sociocultural variables might be related to their presence or absence. To do so, they use the ten measures of cultural complexity by Murdock and Provost (1973): writing and records, fixity of residence, agriculture, urbanization, technological specialization, land transport, money, density of population, level of political integration, and social stratification. The results show that the concept of "monsters" is common among cultures, but not universal. Additionally, the presence of composite beings is related to all the measures of cultural complexity. Finally, the authors wanted to test which variables are more relevant. They use a machine learning method (decision trees and random forests), which suggests that the most important variables are social stratification and higher inter-group contact facilitated by land vehicles.

This article aims to answer the question: Does the imagery of composite beings, also known as monsters, appear cross-culturally? The authors use the Standard Cross-Cultural Sample to test whether these mythical figures are universal and which sociocultural variables might be related to their presence or absence. To do so, they use the ten measures of cultural complexity by Murdock and Provost (1973): writing and records, fixity of residence, agriculture, urbanization, technological specialization, land transport, money, density of population, level of political integration, and social stratification. The results show that the concept of "monsters" is common among cultures, but not universal. Additionally, the presence of composite beings is related to all the measures of cultural complexity. Finally, the authors wanted to test which variables are more relevant. They use a machine learning method (decision trees and random forests), which suggests that the most important variables are social stratification and higher inter-group contact facilitated by land vehicles.

This article aims to answer the question: Does the imagery of composite beings, also known as monsters, appear cross-culturally? The authors use the Standard Cross-Cultural Sample to test whether these mythical figures are universal and which sociocultural variables might be related to their presence or absence. To do so, they use the ten measures of cultural complexity by Murdock and Provost (1973): writing and records, fixity of residence, agriculture, urbanization, technological specialization, land transport, money, density of population, level of political integration, and social stratification. The results show that the concept of "monsters" is common among cultures, but not universal. Additionally, the presence of composite beings is related to all the measures of cultural complexity. Finally, the authors wanted to test which variables are more relevant. They use a machine learning method (decision trees and random forests), which suggests that the most important variables are social stratification and higher inter-group contact facilitated by land vehicles.

This article aims to answer the question: Does the imagery of composite beings, also known as monsters, appear cross-culturally? The authors use the Standard Cross-Cultural Sample to test whether these mythical figures are universal and which sociocultural variables might be related to their presence or absence. To do so, they use the ten measures of cultural complexity by Murdock and Provost (1973): writing and records, fixity of residence, agriculture, urbanization, technological specialization, land transport, money, density of population, level of political integration, and social stratification. The results show that the concept of "monsters" is common among cultures, but not universal. Additionally, the presence of composite beings is related to all the measures of cultural complexity. Finally, the authors wanted to test which variables are more relevant. They use a machine learning method (decision trees and random forests), which suggests that the most important variables are social stratification and higher inter-group contact facilitated by land vehicles.

This article aims to answer the question: Does the imagery of composite beings, also known as monsters, appear cross-culturally? The authors use the Standard Cross-Cultural Sample to test whether these mythical figures are universal and which sociocultural variables might be related to their presence or absence. To do so, they use the ten measures of cultural complexity by Murdock and Provost (1973): writing and records, fixity of residence, agriculture, urbanization, technological specialization, land transport, money, density of population, level of political integration, and social stratification. The results show that the concept of "monsters" is common among cultures, but not universal. Additionally, the presence of composite beings is related to all the measures of cultural complexity. Finally, the authors wanted to test which variables are more relevant. They use a machine learning method (decision trees and random forests), which suggests that the most important variables are social stratification and higher inter-group contact facilitated by land vehicles.

This article aims to answer the question: Does the imagery of composite beings, also known as monsters, appear cross-culturally? The authors use the Standard Cross-Cultural Sample to test whether these mythical figures are universal and which sociocultural variables might be related to their presence or absence. To do so, they use the ten measures of cultural complexity by Murdock and Provost (1973): writing and records, fixity of residence, agriculture, urbanization, technological specialization, land transport, money, density of population, level of political integration, and social stratification. The results show that the concept of "monsters" is common among cultures, but not universal. Additionally, the presence of composite beings is related to all the measures of cultural complexity. Finally, the authors wanted to test which variables are more relevant. They use a machine learning method (decision trees and random forests), which suggests that the most important variables are social stratification and higher inter-group contact facilitated by land vehicles.

This article aims to answer the question: Does the imagery of composite beings, also known as monsters, appear cross-culturally? The authors use the Standard Cross-Cultural Sample to test whether these mythical figures are universal and which sociocultural variables might be related to their presence or absence. To do so, they use the ten measures of cultural complexity by Murdock and Provost (1973): writing and records, fixity of residence, agriculture, urbanization, technological specialization, land transport, money, density of population, level of political integration, and social stratification. The results show that the concept of "monsters" is common among cultures, but not universal. Additionally, the presence of composite beings is related to all the measures of cultural complexity. Finally, the authors wanted to test which variables are more relevant. They use a machine learning method (decision trees and random forests), which suggests that the most important variables are social stratification and higher inter-group contact facilitated by land vehicles.

This article aims to answer the question: Does the imagery of composite beings, also known as monsters, appear cross-culturally? The authors use the Standard Cross-Cultural Sample to test whether these mythical figures are universal and which sociocultural variables might be related to their presence or absence. To do so, they use the ten measures of cultural complexity by Murdock and Provost (1973): writing and records, fixity of residence, agriculture, urbanization, technological specialization, land transport, money, density of population, level of political integration, and social stratification. The results show that the concept of "monsters" is common among cultures, but not universal. Additionally, the presence of composite beings is related to all the measures of cultural complexity. Finally, the authors wanted to test which variables are more relevant. They use a machine learning method (decision trees and random forests), which suggests that the most important variables are social stratification and higher inter-group contact facilitated by land vehicles.

The authors examine correlations between slavery and variables that can potentially be detected archaeologically. The authors do not test specific hypotheses, but aim to explore the variables in a broader sense. As such, the authors use a grounded theory approach to data analysis in order to examine trends that emerge from the data itself.