The evolution and development of human cooperation

Amici, Federica

doi:10.1075/is.16.3.03ami

Cited by 8 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 249 publications

(318 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Estas cuatro dimensiones que componen la escala son consistentes con las propuestas biológicas y evolutivas sobre la predisposición genética (Fortuna & Knafo, 2014) y tendencia innata a realizar conductas prosociales como la asistencia física, compartir recursos, consolar y colaborar (Amici, 2015;Jensen et al, 2014). Si bien las conductas prosociales que emergen en los primeros años de vida esencialmente coinciden con las acciones que conforman la presente escala, aspectos relacionados con el desarrollo biológico (Eisenberg et al, 2006), la cultura y la socialización (Warneken & Tomasello, 2009) influyen en la forma de expresarlas.…”

Section: Discussionunclassified

“…Desde la perspectiva biológica, genes implicados en la actividad de la dopamina, serotonina, oxitocina y vasopresina se asocian con la conducta prosocial (Fortuna & Knafo, 2014). Similarmente, la perspectiva evolutiva propone que existen tendencias innatas prosociales, cuyo fin es propiciar la supervivencia de la especie (Amici, 2015;Warneken & Tomasello, 2009). Ambas perspectivas consideran que colaborar (Amici, 2015), compartir recursos (Jensen, Vaish, & Schmidt, 2014), asistir físicamente a otros y consolar (Warneken & Tomasello, 2009) son manifestaciones prosociales que podrían ser comunes en los humanos.…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

Desarrollo de una Escala de Conducta Prosocial para Adultos en México

Perez¹,

Aragón²,

Liberty³

et al. 2021

REV IBEROAM DIAGN EV

View full text Add to dashboard Buy / Rent full text

“…This result suggests that the perceived autonomy of the sharer is not sufficient to elicit a more positive evaluation of an unacquainted individual’s prosociality. The recipient’s autonomy in one-time food sharing is also important for the formation of prosociality evaluation, suggesting that the influence of one-time food sharing on people’s social evaluation may be subtle and subject to situational factors ( Amici, 2015 ).…”

Section: Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Food Sharing With Choice: Influence on Social Evaluation

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Buy / Rent full text

We conducted two studies to investigate the influence of food sharing on people’s social evaluation. In Study 1, the results of an online survey revealed that Chinese adults expected voluntary food sharing to influence the recipient’s social evaluation of the sharer. In Study 2, we ran a laboratory-based experiment in which each participant broke bread with one of two unacquainted individuals. When the participants could choose whom to share food with, they rated the selected person as being more prosocial than the person they did not choose. These results demonstrate the influence of voluntary food sharing with choice on people’s social evaluation of unacquainted individuals, and shed some light on the influence of eating behavior on social perception.

show abstract

“…Cooperation can be defined as any costly behavior that is beneficial to another individual or to all individuals involved in a task (Amici, 2015; Clutton-Brock, 2009; Melis & Semmann, 2010). Wolves breed cooperatively (Coppinger & Coppinger, 2001; Mech & Boitani, 2003) and also often hunt cooperatively in packs of two or more animals (MacNulty, Tallian, Stahler, & Smith, 2014; Mech, 2007; Mech & Boitani, 2003; Muro, Escobedo, Spector, & Coppinger, 2011).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Dogs (Canis familiaris) and wolves (Canis lupus) coordinate with conspecifics in a social dilemma.

Bräuer

Stenglein²,

Amici

2020

Journal of Comparative Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Buy / Rent full text

Cooperative hunting is generally considered to be a cognitively challenging activity, as individuals have to coordinate movements along with a partner and at the same time react to the prey. Wolves are said to engage in cooperative hunting regularly, whereas dogs could have maintained, improved, or reduced their cooperative skills during the domestication process. We compared the performance of individuals from two wolf packs and two dog groups with similar gender and rank structure. Members of these groups were tested in dyads with a problem-solving paradigm that involved aspects of a hunting-like situation. Subjects needed to coordinate their actions in order to get food. They were confronted with a social dilemma, in which an individual benefit from being selfish, unless the partner also chooses the selfish alternative, in which case the whole dyad loses. In the task, one partner was required to draw a barrier toward it by rushing forward, allowing the other partner to access the food, at which point both partners were allowed to access the food. Most dyads could solve the problem, with significant variation in their performance but no differences between species. However, the probability of taking the risk in a dyad depended on the species and rank of the individual and on cofeeding in the dyad. The results of this study show that wolves do not always outperform dogs when coordinating their actions, but that the cooperative behavior of Canis depends on many factors, including rank, type of task, and tolerance within the dyad.

show abstract

“…the fact of cooperation with kin and the fact of cooperation with non-kinare scientifically important and have been investigated and heavily theorized, most famously in Hamilton's Rule and subsequent contributions to kin selection theory (Hamilton 1964a(Hamilton , 1964b Birch & Okasha 2013). There has also been a great deal of back and forth among scholars about what 'cooperation' actually consists in and how it might have evolved in humans and other species (West et al 2006;Amici 2015). But it has primarily been the secondif you like, more surprisingfact of cooperation with non-kin that has generated a huge amount of theoretical and empirical work across a wide range of disciplines in recent decades.To give an example: experimental economists, inspired by game theoretic approaches, have studied how people behave when asked to divide money with others under a given set of rules (for a critical overview of this field, see Guala 2005).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Kin and non-kin cooperation in China

Stafford¹

2020

Cooperation in Chinese Communities

View full text Add to dashboard Buy / Rent full text

The fact that people in China and elsewhere cooperate, in various senses, with their close kinfor example, that Chinese parents make sacrifices for their children with an eye on the future, or that Chinese siblings do things together for mutual benefit across the lifecycleis not very surprising.From an evolutionary point of view, it could be said to make good sense. What is more surprising, one could say, is the fact that people in China and elsewhere cooperate so much with non-kin, and even with total strangers. To be clear, both of these factsi.e. the fact of cooperation with kin and the fact of cooperation with non-kinare scientifically important and have been investigated and heavily theorized, most famously in Hamilton's Rule and subsequent contributions to kin selection theory (Hamilton 1964a(Hamilton , 1964b Birch & Okasha 2013). There has also been a great deal of back and forth among scholars about what 'cooperation' actually consists in and how it might have evolved in humans and other species (West et al. 2006;Amici 2015). But it has primarily been the secondif you like, more surprisingfact of cooperation with non-kin that has generated a huge amount of theoretical and empirical work across a wide range of disciplines in recent decades.To give an example: experimental economists, inspired by game theoretic approaches, have studied how people behave when asked to divide money with others under a given set of rules (for a critical overview of this field, see Guala 2005). One broad finding is that on average people are surprisingly 'cooperative', in the sense that they will give money to others even when the rules of a particular game allow them to be as selfish as they like. Notably, however, virtually all such research examines cooperation between non-kinin fact, it is primarily about cooperation between total strangers who do not even meet in person for the sake of the experimental tasks. To give another, very different, example: developmental psychologists, by means of an ingenious set of studies, have shown that human infants and children are readily disposed to cooperate with others (for a general introduction to such studies, see Tomasello 2009). More specifically, they have better skills and dispositions for cooperation than do our close primate relatives. But, again, the bulk of such

show abstract

The evolution and development of human cooperation

Cited by 8 publications

References 249 publications

Desarrollo de una Escala de Conducta Prosocial para Adultos en México

Food Sharing With Choice: Influence on Social Evaluation

Dogs (Canis familiaris) and wolves (Canis lupus) coordinate with conspecifics in a social dilemma.

Kin and non-kin cooperation in China

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About