Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33649461›Full record

ArticleNature human behaviour2021

Gains to cooperation drive the evolution of egalitarianism.

Paul L Hooper, Hillard S Kaplan, Adrian V Jaeggi

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Nature human behaviour, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Toward an evolutionary ecology of (in)equality.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2023
    Article
  3. Identifying key socioecological factors influencing the expression of egalitarianism and inequality among foragers.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2023
    Article
  4. Modelling the role of environmental circumscription in the evolution of inequality.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2023
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Paul L HooperDepartment of Anthropology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, USA. p@systemsscience.co.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4673-7513
Hillard S KaplanEconomic Science Institute, Chapman University, Orange, CA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7398-7358
Adrian V JaeggiInstitute of Evolutionary Medicine, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1695-0388

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

What conditions favour egalitarianism, that is, muted hierarchies with relatively equal distributions of resources? Here, we combine the hawk-dove and prisoner's dilemma games to model the effects of economic defensibility, costs of competition and gains from cooperation on egalitarianism, operationalized as the absence of hawks. We show that a 'leveller' strategy, which punishes hawkishness in the hawk-dove game with defection in the prisoner's dilemma, can be evolutionarily stable provided that the gains from cooperation are high relative to the benefits of hawkishness. Under these conditions, rare mutant levellers select for hawks that acquiesce to punishment by playing dove. If these 'acquiescent hawks' become common, levellers outperform hawks and establish a new egalitarian equilibrium. An analysis of human foraging groups corroborates these results, as groups with a greater reliance on cooperation are more egalitarian. Cooperation fosters greater equality when individuals can withhold its benefits from would-be dominant individuals.

Indexed as

Cooperative BehaviorGames, ExperimentalSocial DominanceSocial EvolutionHumansPrisoner Dilemma

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.