Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40628473›Full record

ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2025

Reciprocity evolves more readily in competitive than cooperative socio-ecologies.

Angelo Romano, Ali Seyhun Saral, Carsten K W De Dreu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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.

Angelo RomanoLeiden University, Leiden, Zuid-Holland, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-7502-9268
Ali Seyhun SaralInstitute for Advanced Study in Toulouse, University of Toulouse Capitole, Toulouse, France.ORCID 0000-0002-5523-5355
Carsten K W De DreuUniversity of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.

Funding

H2020 European Research Council
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Tracking what others did and matching other's expected actions is seen across a range of biological systems. As reciprocal matching rewards and reinforces cooperators and punishes and discourages non-cooperators, reciprocal matching can help communal living. The strength of reciprocity as a social strategy also comes from its success in protecting the individual against the risk of exploitation by punishing defectors. Although often overlooked, this feature carries a strong weight when exploitation risk is high. Here, we use evolutionary agent-based simulations to examine how reciprocal matching evolves across competitive socio-ecologies with a high risk of exploitation and cooperative socio-ecologies with a lower risk of exploitation. Results show that reciprocal matching as a social strategy for communal living evolves more readily in more competitive socio-ecologies where the risk of exploitation is high. Results also hold in standard Prisoner's Dilemmas with its equilibrium in single strategies (i.e. unconditional non-cooperation), for specific forms of reciprocity (i.e. tit-for-tat) and the likelihood of repeated interactions. Because reciprocal matching requires some capacity for social perception and memory, these findings suggest that such capacities for social cognition likewise serve to protect against exploitation and evolved in more competitive socio-ecologies as well.

Indexed as

Biological EvolutionCompetitive BehaviorCooperative BehaviorSocial BehaviorGame TheoryHumansPrisoner Dilemmacompetitioncooperationevolvingprotectsreciprocityrewards

Identifiers

PMID40628473
PMCPMC12308328

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.