Altruism and selfishness

Rachlin, Howard

doi:10.1017/s0140525x02000055

Cited by 159 publications

(121 citation statements)

References 141 publications

(173 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

106

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The idea that cooperation in humans may be associated with intrinsic reinforcement and emotions has already been proposed (Frank, 1988;Rachlin, 2002;Sober and Wilson, 1998). In humans, such processes have been linked to the complex socio-cultural milieu of human behavior.…”

Section: Cooperation As Social Behaviormentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Why cooperate?An economic perspective is not enough

Schuster

2004

Behavioural Processes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cooperation is usually explained from an economic perspective focused mainly on the tangible outcomes received by individuals that are also dependent on the behavior of others, with little reference to the actual behaviors used when cooperating. The potential consequences of social dimensions associated with cooperative behaviors are minimized in Skinnerian and game-theory models by means of anonymous subjects that behave individually while physically isolated in separate chambers. When cooperation and non-cooperation occur in the real world, however, they are often associated not only with different outcomes but also with different behaviors. Unlike non-cooperation, cooperative behaviors are usually intrinsically social, influenced by the presence and behaviors of familiar partners. Research is described that addresses whether the social dimensions of cooperative actions go beyond mere description of behaviors to also explain why cooperation occurs. One way to resolve the relative importance of economic and social factors for explanations of cooperation is to measure choice between the options of cooperation and non-cooperation. The economic perspective, linked to models derived from game theory, frames the question as a choice determined by differences in tangible outcomes such as food or money that, in evolutionary terms, are surrogates for gains in fitness. From a behavioral perspective, the choice between cooperation and non-cooperation is also determined by social dimensions associated only with cooperation. The influence of social cooperation on preference was examined by means of two rectangular chambers interconnected by a T-maze. In one chamber, pairs of laboratory rats were reinforced with saccharine solution for coordinating back-and-forth shuttling; in the second chamber, a single animal was reinforced for back-and-forth shuttling performed in isolation. With outcomes equalized between the two options, cooperation was preferred by the majority of subjects. Moreover, variation in the relative rate of reinforcement during cooperation was not a strong predictor of choice whereas the level of intra-pair coordination was positively related to preference. Implications of this result are discussed for both method and theory, including the hypothesis that the preference is influenced by intrinsic reinforcements evoked by cooperating. The consequences for evolutionary fitness would then arise not only from tangible outcomes but from the relationships that develop when cooperating even when immediate and tangible pay-offs are absent, insufficient or sub-optimal. The impact of cooperative relationships on fitness may therefore not occur immediately but in the future, and perhaps in another context, when they influence outcomes that have a significant impact on survival and reproduction.

show abstract

Section: Cooperation As Social Behaviormentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The dilemma is therefore not about self-interest versus cooperative altruism but about whether self-interest emerges over the short or long term. Rachlin (2002) and Baker and Rachlin (2002a, b) characterized this not as a social dilemma but as a problem of individual self-control.…”

Section: Choice From the Economic Perspectivementioning

confidence: 99%

Why cooperate?An economic perspective is not enough

Schuster

2004

Behavioural Processes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A possible explanation of this relationship could be the delay in reinforcement for altruistic behaviour. Altruistic acts carry immediate costs, while potential benefits (which may compensate or even overcompensate these costs, such as social approval, prestige, reciprocation) emerge in a long-term perspective (Rachlin, 2000;2002). Consequently, individuals who find a delay in obtaining a reward more devaluing may be less willing to engage in altruistic behaviour.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social discounting rate is negatively correlated with fluid intelligence

Osiński

Ostaszewski

Karbowski

2014

Personality and Individual Differences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ArticleSocial discounting rate is negatively correlated with fluid intelligence Personality and Individual Differences Suggested Citation: Osiński, Jerzy; Ostaszewski, Paweł; Karbowski, Adam (2014) : Social discounting rate is negatively correlated with fluid intelligence, Personality and Individual Differences, ISSN 0191-8869, Elsevier, Amsterdam, Vol. 59, pp. 44-49, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2013 The purpose of the study was to verify a hypothesis, inspired by the handicap principle, of a positive relationship between subjective value of a hypothetical monetary reward shared with others and the level of fluid intelligence. Manipulation involved the amount of reward to be shared (small vs. large amount) and subject's relationship to recipients (related vs. unrelated). As expected, a positive correlation was found between the subjective value of a reward to be shared with others, measured as the area under the curve for the discounting function and Raven Advanced Progressive Matrices scores, but the relationship was only present for rewards shared with relatives. In addition, participants who made altruistic choices in all items scored higher in RPM than those who were not as consistent.The implications of results for the evolutionary interpretation of the relationship between intelligence and altruism are discussed.

show abstract

“…That there is a relation between human self-control and human altruism has been noted in modern philosophy (Parfit, 1984), economics (Simon, 1995), and psychology (Ainslie, 1992;Rachlin, 2002). Biologists have argued that we humans inherit altruistic tendencies, that evolution acts over groups as well as individuals (Sober & Wilson, 1998).…”

Section: Giving Watson Self-control and Altruismmentioning

confidence: 98%

Making IBM’s Computer Watson Human

Rachlin¹

2014

The Escape of the Mind

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This essay uses the recent victory of an IBM computer (Watson) in the TV game, Jeopardy, to speculate on the abilities Watson would need, in addition to those it has, to be human. The essay's basic premise is that to be human is to behave as humans behave and to function in society as humans function. Alternatives to this premise are considered and rejected. The viewpoint of the essay is that of teleological behaviorism. Mental states are defined as temporally extended patterns of overt behavior. From this viewpoint (although Watson does not currently have them), essential human attributes such as consciousness, the ability to love, to feel pain, to sense, to perceive, and to imagine may all be possessed by a computer. Most crucially, a computer may possess self-control and may act altruistically. However, the computer's appearance, its ability to make specific movements, its possession of particular internal structures (e.g., whether those structures are organic or inorganic), and the presence of any nonmaterial ''self,'' are all incidental to its humanity.

show abstract

Altruism and selfishness

Cited by 159 publications

References 141 publications

Why cooperate?An economic perspective is not enough

Why cooperate?An economic perspective is not enough

Social discounting rate is negatively correlated with fluid intelligence

Making IBM’s Computer Watson Human

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About