ReviewFrontiers in psychology2016
The Origin of Social Evaluation, Social Eavesdropping, Reputation Formation, Image Scoring or What You Will.
Review in Frontiers in psychology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- The "I" in egalitarianism: Hadza hunter-gatherers averse to inequality primarily when personally unfavorable.PNAS nexus · 2026Article
- The coevolution of cognition and sociality.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2025Review
- An exploratory study of critical incidents within public organizations during leadership change.F1000Research · 2024Article
- Impact of the Dog-Human Bond on Canine Social Evaluation: Attachment Predicts Preference toward Prosocial Actors.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023Article
- Local stability of cooperation in a continuous model of indirect reciprocity.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Do marmosets understand others' conversations? A thermography approach.Science advances · 2021Article
- Asking for help: Do dogs take into account prior experiences with people?Learning & behavior · 2020Article
- Investigating Indirect and Direct Reputation Formation in Asian Elephants (Frontiers in psychology · 2020Article
- Effects of the Presence and Behavior of In-Group and Out-Group Strangers on Moral Hypocrisy.Frontiers in psychology · 2020Article
- Food Sharing With Choice: Influence on Social Evaluation.Frontiers in psychology · 2020Article
- Article
- Do Dogs Prefer Helpers in an Infant-Based Social Evaluation Task?Frontiers in psychology · 2019Article
- Are Proselfs More Deceptive and Hypocritical? Social Image Concerns in Appearing Fair.Frontiers in psychology · 2018Article
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
Social evaluation is a mental process that leverages the preference toward prosocial partners (positivity bias) against the avoidance of antisocial individuals (negativity bias) in a cooperative context. The phenomenon is well-known in humans, and recently comparative investigations looked at the possible evolutionary origins. So far social evaluation has been investigated mainly in non-human and human primates and dogs, however, there are few data on the presence of negativity/positivity bias in client-cleaner reef fish interactions as well. Unfortunately, the comparative approach to social evaluation is hindered by conceptual and procedural differences in experimental studies. By reviewing current knowledge on social evaluation in different species, we aim to point out that the capacity for social evaluation is not restricted to humans alone; however, its building blocks (negativity and positivity bias) may be more widespread separately. Due to its importance in survival, negativity bias likely to be widespread among animals; however, there has been less intensive selective pressure for the identification of prosocial companions, thus the latter ability may have emerged only in certain social species. We present a general framework and argue that negativity and positivity bias evolve independently and can be considered as social evaluation only if a unified behavior and cognitive system deals with both biases in concert.
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.