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.

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.