Preview

Explaining Altruistic Behavior in Human

Powerful Essays
Open Document
Open Document
9148 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Explaining Altruistic Behavior in Human
Evolution and Human Behavior 24 (2003) 153 – 172

Explaining altruistic behavior in humans
Herbert Gintisa,b,*, Samuel Bowlesa,b, Robert Boydc, Ernst Fehrd a Santa Fe Institute, 1399 Hyde Park Road, Santa Fe, NM 87501, USA
Department of Economics, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA 01003, USA c Department of Anthropology, University of California at Los Angeles, 405 Hilgard Avenue,
Box 951361 Los Angeles, CA 90095-1361, USA d University of Zurich, Blumlisalpstrae 10 CH-8006 Zurich, Switzerland
¨
¨
¨
b

Received 15 February 2002; received in revised form 29 November 2002

Abstract
Recent experimental research has revealed forms of human behavior involving interaction among unrelated individuals that have proven difficult to explain in terms of kin or reciprocal altruism. One such trait, strong reciprocity is a predisposition to cooperate with others and to punish those who violate the norms of cooperation, at personal cost, even when it is implausible to expect that these costs will be repaid. We present evidence supporting strong reciprocity as a schema for predicting and understanding altruism in humans. We show that under conditions plausibly characteristic of the early stages of human evolution, a small number of strong reciprocators could invade a population of selfregarding types, and strong reciprocity is an evolutionary stable strategy. Although most of the evidence we report is based on behavioral experiments, the same behaviors are regularly described in everyday life, for example, in wage setting by firms, tax compliance, and cooperation in the protection of local environmental public goods. D 2003 Elsevier Science Inc. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Altruism; Reciprocity; Experimental games; Evolution of cooperation

1. Introduction
The explanatory power of inclusive fitness theory and reciprocal altruism (Hamilton, 1964;
Trivers, 1971; Williams, 1966) convinced a generation of researchers that what appears to be



References: Acheson, J. (1988). The lobster gangs of Maine. Hanover, NH: New England Universities Press. Akerlof, G. A. (1982). Labor contracts as partial gift exchange. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 97, 543 – 569. Alexander, R. D. (1987). The biology of moral systems. New York: Aldine. Andreoni, J. (1995). Cooperation in public goods experiments: kindness or confusion. American Economic Review, 85, 891 – 904. Andreoni, J., Erard, B., & Feinstein, J. (1998). Tax compliance. Journal of Economic Literature, 36, 818 – 860. Bewley, T. F. (2000). Why wages don’t fall during a recession. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Bingham, P. M. (1999). Human uniqueness: a general theory. Quarterly Review of Biology, 74, 133 – 169. Blau, P. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York: Wiley. Blount, S. (1995). When social outcomes aren’t fair. The effect of causal attributions on preferences. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 63, 131 – 144. Boehm, C. (1982). The evolutionary development of morality as an effect of dominance behavior and conflict interference Bowles, S. (2001). Individual interactions, group conflicts, and the evolution of preferences. In: S. N. Durlauf, & H Bowles, S., & Gintis, H. (2002). Homo reciprocans. Nature, 415, 125 – 128. Boyd, R. (1982). Density dependent mortality and the evolution of social behavior. Animal Behavior, 30, 972 – 982. Boyd, R., Gintis, H., Bowles, S., & Richerson, P. J. (2002). Altruistic punishment in large groups evolves by interdemic group selection Boyd, R., & Richerson, P. J. (1988). The evolution of reciprocity in sizable groups. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 132, 337 – 356. Camerer, C., & Thaler, R. (1995). Ultimatums, dictators, and manners. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 9, 209 – 219. Choi, J.-K. (2002). Three essays on the evolution of cooperation. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts. Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (1992). The psychological foundations of culture. In: J. H. Barkow, L. Cosmides, & J Darlington, P. J. (1975). Group selection, altruism, reinforcement and throwing in human evolution. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, U Dawes, R. M., Orbell, J. M., & Van de Kragt, J. C. (1986). Organizing groups for collective action. American Political Science Review, 80, 1171 – 1185. Dawes, R. M., & Thaler, R. (1988). Cooperation. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 2, 187 – 197. Dawkins, R. (1976). The selfish gene. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Dawkins, R. (1989). The selfish gene (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Eibl-Eibesfeldt, I. (1982). Warfare, man’s indoctrinability and group selection. Journal of Comparative Ethnology, 60, 177 – 198. Falk, A., Fehr, E., & Fischbacher, U. (2001). Driving forces of informal sanctions. Working Paper No. 59, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics. Falk, A., Fehr, E, & Fischbacher, U. (2002). Testing theories of fairness and reciprocity — intentions matter. Fehr, E., & Gachter, S. (2000). Cooperation and punishment. American Economic Review, 90, 980 – 994. Fehr, E., Kirchsteiger, G., & Riedl, A. (1993). Does fairness prevent market clearing? Quarterly Journal of Economics, 108, 437 – 459. Fehr, E., Kirchsteiger, G., & Riedl, A. (1998). Gift exchange and reciprocity in competitive experimental markets. H. Gintis et al. / Evolution and Human Behavior 24 (2003) 153–172 171 Fehr, E., & Schmidt, K. M. (1999). A theory of fairness, competition, and cooperation. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114, 817 – 868. Feldman, M. W., Cavalli-Sforza, L. L., & Peck, J. R. (1985). Gene – culture coevolution: models for the evolution of altruism with cultural transmission 82, 5814 – 5818. Fifer, F. C. (1987). The adoption of bipedalism by the hominids: a new hypothesis. Human Evolution, 2, 135 – 147. Foster, K. R., Wenseleers, T., & Ratnieks, F. I. W. (2001). Spite: Hamilton’s unproven theory. Annales Zoologici Fennici, 38, 229 – 238. Fudenberg, D., & Maskin, F. (1986). The folk theorem in repeated games with discounting or with incomplete information Gachter, S., & Falk, A. (2002). Reputation or reciprocity? Consequences for labour relations. Scandinavian ¨ Gachter, S., & Fehr, E. (1999). Collective action as a social exchange. Journal of Economic Behavior and ¨ Ghiselin, M. T. (1974). The economy of nature and the evolution of sex. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Gintis, H. (2000a). Game theory evolving. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Gintis, H. (2000b). Strong reciprocity and human sociality. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 206, 169 – 179. Goodall, J. (1964). Tool-using and aimed throwing in a community of free-living chimpanzees. Nature, 201, 1264 – 1266. Guth, W., & Tietz, R. (1990). Ultimatum bargaining behavior: a survey and comparison of experimental results. Hamilton, W. D. (1964). The genetical evolution of social behavior. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 37,

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Satisfactory Essays

    MPS4 Fall 2014

    • 513 Words
    • 2 Pages

    E. Does the model of reciprocity depend on shared genes between the altruist and the recipient?…

    • 513 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    References: Flynn, S.V., & Black, L. L. (2011) An Emergent Theory of Altruism and Self-Interest. Journal…

    • 823 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Nice By Nature Summary

    • 173 Words
    • 1 Page

    In the article “Nice by nature?”, the author says that certain animals living in a group, alleying tightly in their daily activities like monkeys have a sense of fairness and altruism. To begin with, according to a study in which two capuchin monkeys working together toward a goal tended to enjoy a reward together. They avoided fighting over the reward. If this time the monkey gained the reward, next time the other one would surely gain it. In addition to that, it is interesting to find that the money would accept a lesser reward and let his friend have the better one.…

    • 173 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    *Social Exchange theory: We weigh the pros and cons of rewards and consequences of our actions…

    • 674 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Psy/490 Pay It Forward

    • 835 Words
    • 4 Pages

    References: Krebs, D. L. (1970). Altruism: An examination of the concept and a review of the literature. Psychological Bulletin, 73(4), 258-302. doi:10.1037/h0028987…

    • 835 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Altruism is found in many animal species, and the origin lies deep in evolutionary history… In nonhuman animals, altruism includes parental care, warning calls, cooperative defense, rescue behavior, and food sharing; it may also involve self-sacrifice…[honeybee] barbs have been described as instruments of altruistic self-sacrifice. Although the individual dies, the bee’s genes, shared in the colony of relatives, survive. Human altruism also originates in, and helps serve, genetic purpose.22…

    • 1107 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Theories Of Altruism

    • 422 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Egoism is the act of behaving self-interestedly, and is perceived as a negative trait even though it can be seen as a tool of survival (Rosenstand, 2003: 131). However, there is an opposing theory, which is altruism. Altruism is defined as a concern for the welfare of others and is considered virtuous (Rosenstand, 2003: 150). We are often made aware of heroes who risk their lives for others and these heroes inspire many. We are encouraged to be altruistic, early in our lives. Nonetheless, one notices how altruist acts usually include rewards, even if it’s just a simple thank you. This leads to questions such as, does true altruism exist, or do people always have a motive as to why they perform altruistically?…

    • 422 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Altruism, essentially the performing of an act that is costly to yourself but directly benefits another can be measured and explored via many pathways. Experimentation (prisoners dilemma game), modern humans and studies via various animals all contribute. As does data from genetic and neurobiological evidence highlighting the importance of a multi-method approach within evolutionary psychology in order to get attain accurate and essentially ultimate…

    • 1035 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Social species, by definition, form organizations that extend beyond the individual. These structures evolved hand in hand with behavioral,…

    • 4487 Words
    • 18 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    support for the social brain theory. However, differences between taxonomic orders in the stability of the transition between…

    • 2832 Words
    • 12 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Holmes, J.G. (1981). The exchange process in close relationships: Micro behavior and macro motives. In M.J. Lerner & S.C. Lerner (Eds.), the justice motive in social behavior (pp. 261–284). New York: Plenum.…

    • 303 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Human Observation Project

    • 2537 Words
    • 11 Pages

    Bibliography: Batson, Daniel C. "Altruism and Prosocial Behavior." In The Handbook of Social Psychology, 4th ed., edited by Daniel T. Gilbert, Susan T. Fiske, and Gardner Lindzey. New York: Oxford University Press, 1998. ISBN: 0195213769.…

    • 2537 Words
    • 11 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Are Moral Emotions Adaptive?

    • 3225 Words
    • 13 Pages

    Batson, C. et al. (1995). Immorality from empathy-induced altruism: When compassion and justice conflict. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68 pp.1042– 1054 .…

    • 3225 Words
    • 13 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Better Essays

    Cited: Galef, B. G. (2009). Strategies for social learning: Testing predictions from formal theory. Advances in the Study of Behavior, 39, 117-147.…

    • 1774 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    In an environment with just a group of individuals who are close relatives or kin, altruism and cooperation can increase their fitness due to genetics. If an organism performs a selfless act, this can benefit their other relatives by increasing their fitness of the genes that they share in their genepool (Hamilton 1963). With reciprocal altruism there lies this idea of manipulation to urge the return of the favor. This idea is utilized in an environment of organisms who are not related. Reciprocal Altruism does not quite work to increase fitness of genes, the organisms are manipulated by punishment. If a being takes advantage of the altruistic behavior and gains they uptake without returning or “reciprocating” an altruistic action, they can be punished. By the use of reinforcements, they are being manipulated to return the favor and keep the continuous cycle of reciprocal altruism moving (Trivers 1971). In addition, the concept of indirect reciprocity is also a factor. This reciprocity is completing the idea of returning a favor, but not for the true means of being altruistic due to the fact that those who reciprocate will only reciprocate with those also have a “good image score” rather than those who will not reciprocate who have a “bad image score,” otherwise known as…

    • 542 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays