Preemptive Striking in Individual and Group Conflict

Mifune, Nobuhiro; Hizen, Yoichi; Kamijo, Yoshio; Okano, Yoshitaka

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0154859

Cited by 17 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This difference may reflect the fact that the cost of being attacked and thus the motivation of defensive aggression were smaller in the current study (JPY 500, or half of the endowment in the current study versus JPY 1,000 or two-thirds of the endowment in the previous study). This difference suggests that the greater the suffering from an attack from the opponent the more willing one is to defend their self-interest by preemptively eliminating the potential of an attack from the opponent (cf., Mifune et al, 2016). This possibility is worthy of further investigation in another study in which the damage caused by an attack from the opponent is manipulated in a single experiment.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Another study using a design that reduces the participants’ concerns with the use of aggression would definitely help broaden the scope of the conclusions. Another possible limitation is the lack of face-to-face communication among the same-group participants, because group members often conspire to make group-based decisions such as preemptive strikes (cf., Mifune et al, 2016). Aggression may be against norms when performed by an individual, but it can be condoned or even praised as the norm when it is agreed upon by group members.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Intergroup Biases in Fear-induced Aggression

Mifune

Simunovic²,

Yamagishi

2017

Front. Psychol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using a recently created preemptive strike game (PSG) with 176 participants, we investigated if the motivations of spite and/or fear promotes aggression that requires a small cost to the aggressor and imposes a larger cost on the opponent, and confirmed the earlier finding that fear does but spite does not promote intergroup aggression when the groups are characterized as minimal groups; additionally, the rate of intergroup aggression did not vary according to the group membership of the opponent. The PSG represents a situation in which both the motivations of spite and of fear can logically drive players to choose an option of aggression against an opponent. Participants decide whether or not to attack another participant, who also has the same capability. The decision is made in real time, using a computer. We discuss theoretical implications of our findings on the evolutionary foundations of intragroup cooperation and intergroup aggression. The evolutionary model of intergroup aggression, or the parochial altruism model, posits that intragroup cooperation and intergroup aggression have co-evolved, and thus it predicts both intragroup cooperation and intergroup aggression to emerge even in a minimal group devoid of a history of intergroup relationships. The finding that only intragroup cooperation but not intergroup aggression emerged in the minimal group experiments strongly suggests that intergroup aggression involves a psychological mechanism that is independent from that of intragroup cooperation. We further discuss the implications of these findings on real-world politics and military strategy.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intergroup Biases in Fear-induced Aggression

Mifune

Simunovic²,

Yamagishi

2017

Front. Psychol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We were also interested in the possibility that the AVP effect, if any, might be amplified at the group level 27 . Because humans have evolved in small, closely-related social groups 28 , AVP may enhance human defensive aggression particularly at the group level.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Vasopressin enhances human preemptive strike in both males and females

Kawada

Nagasawa²,

Murata³

et al. 2019

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The neuropeptide arginine vasopressin (AVP), which is known to modulate a wide range of social behaviors in animals, has been identified as a modulator of various negative responses to social stimuli in humans. However, behavioral evidence directly supporting its involvement in human defensive aggression has been rare. We investigated the effect of intranasal AVP on defensive aggression in a laboratory experiment, using an incentivized economic game called the “preemptive strike game” (PSG). Participants played PSG individually (1 on 1) as well as in pairs (2 on 2) under either AVP or saline. We observed that exogenous but not basal AVP modulated the attack rate in PSG for both male and female participants. A model-based analysis of the aggregation of individual attack preferences into pair decisions revealed that the AVP effect on defensive aggression occurred mainly at the individual level and was not amplified at the pair level. Overall, these results present the first evidence that intranasal AVP promotes human defensive aggression for both males and females in a bilateral situation where each party can potentially damage the resources of the other party. These findings also parallel accumulating evidence from non-human animals concerning AVP’s involvement in territorial defense against potential intruders.

show abstract

“…For instance, asymmetric prisoner's dilemma experiments show that players at a disadvantage tend to defect against group interests more frequently [39,40]. A similar result is observed in asymmetric coordination games [41].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 54%

Voting on Behalf of a Future Generation: A Laboratory Experiment

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper investigates a new voting rule wherein some people are given extra votes to serve as proxies for future generations. We predict that this voting scheme affects the voting behavior of those who do not receive an extra vote (i.e., single-ballot voters) because they are less likely to become a pivot, while proxy voters are expected to behave in support of the future generation. To test this prediction, we compare three scenarios wherein single-ballot voters would cast a vote: (a) one-voter-one-vote scenario wherein all voters cast only a single ballot; (b) a standard proxy-voting scenario wherein other voters cast two ballots, and the second vote is to cast for the benefit of a future generation; and (c) a non-proxy-voting scenario wherein other voters cast two ballots with no explanation for the second vote. The result shows that single-ballot voters are less inclined to vote for the future-oriented option in (c) than in (a). This indicates the potential drawback of the new voting scheme. However, there is no difference in the single-ballot voters’ decision between (a) and (b), indicating that the explanation of the second ballot as the proxy is important for reducing the intergenerational inequality through this voting reform.

show abstract

Preemptive Striking in Individual and Group Conflict

Cited by 17 publications

References 37 publications

Intergroup Biases in Fear-induced Aggression

Intergroup Biases in Fear-induced Aggression

Vasopressin enhances human preemptive strike in both males and females

Voting on Behalf of a Future Generation: A Laboratory Experiment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About