ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2014
The reputational and social network benefits of prosociality in an Andean community.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
37 citing papers in PubMed.
- Multiple Reputations: Selective Attention to Competence and Character.Personality & social psychology bulletin · 2026Article
- Tonkean macaques do not prefer the helper or the hinderer in the hill paradigm.Royal Society open science · 2025Article
- Ethics trumps resources in women's and men's evaluations of potential mates and competitors.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- History and Legacy of Andean Research in Nuñoa, Peru.American journal of human biology : the official journal of the Human Biology Council · 2025Article
- Socio-economic predictors of Inuit hunting choices and their implications for climate change adaptation.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2023Article
- The influence of altruistic personality, interpersonal distance and social observation on prosocial behavior: An event-related potential (ERP) study.Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience · 2023Article
- Exposure to automation explains religious declines.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023Article
- Data-driven evolutionary game models for the spread of fairness and cooperation in heterogeneous networks.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2023Article
- Social Support and Network Formation in a Small-Scale Horticulturalist Population.Scientific data · 2022Article
- Oxytocin and the Punitive Hub-Dynamic Spread of Cooperation in Human Social Networks.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2022Article
- Hadza hunter-gatherers with greater exposure to other cultures share more with generous campmates.Biology letters · 2022Article
- Four Puzzles of Reputation-Based Cooperation : Content, Process, Honesty, and Structure.Human nature (Hawthorne, N.Y.) · 2022Article
- Partner choice does not predict prosociality across countries.Evolutionary human sciences · 2022Article
- Reputation and socio-ecology in humans.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2021Review
- Networks of reliable reputations and cooperation: a review.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2021Review
- The content and structure of reputation domains across human societies: a view from the evolutionary social sciences.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2021Article
- Cooperating to show that you care: costly helping as an honest signal of fitness interdependence.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2021Article
- No good deed goes unpunished: the social costs of prosocial behaviour.Evolutionary human sciences · 2021Review
- Scarce and directly beneficial reputations support cooperation.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- How evolutionary behavioural sciences can help us understand behaviour in a pandemic.Evolution, medicine, and public health · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Several theories have emerged to explain how group cooperation (collective action) can arise and be maintained in the face of incentives to engage in free riding. Explanations focusing on reputational benefits and partner choice have particular promise for cases in which punishment is absent or insufficient to deter free riding. In indigenous communities of highland Peru, collective action is pervasive and provides critical benefits. Participation in collective action is unequal across households, but all households share its benefits. Importantly, investment in collective action involves considerable time, energy, and risk. Differential participation in collective action can convey information about qualities of fellow community members that are not easily observable otherwise, such as cooperative intent, knowledge, work ethic, skill, and/or physical vitality. Conveying such information may enhance access to adaptive support networks. Interview and observational data collected in a Peruvian highland community indicate that persons who contributed more to collective action had greater reputations as reliable, hard workers with regard to collective action and also were considered the most respected, influential, and generous people in the community. Additionally, household heads with greater reputations had more social support partners (measured as network indegree centrality), and households with larger support networks experienced fewer illness symptoms.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.