(a) The effect of heterogeneity of , (b) , (c) , and (d) . Individual values of a focal behavioural parameter were varied across individuals in a group of five. Other non-focal parameters were identical across individuals within a group. The basic parameter values assigned to non-focal parameters were , , , and , and groups’ mean values of the various focal parameters were matched to these basic values. We simulated 3 different heterogeneous compositions: The majority (3 of 5 individuals) potentially suffered the hot stove effect (a, b) or had the highest diversity in social learning parameters (c, d; purple); the majority were able to overcome the hot stove effect (a, b) or had moderate heterogeneity in the social learning parameters (c, d; blue); and all individuals had but smaller heterogeneity (green). The yellow diamond shows the homogeneous groups’ performance. Lines are drawn through average results across the same compositional groups. Each round dot represents a group member’s mean performance. The diamonds are the average performance of each group for each composition category. For comparison, asocial learners’ performance, with which the performance of social learners can be evaluated, is shown in gray. For heterogeneous and , the analytical solution of asocial learning performance is shown as a solid-line curve. We ran 20,000 replications for each group composition.