Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) do not develop contingent reciprocity in an experimental task

Chimpanzees provide help to unrelated individuals in a broad range of situations. The pattern of helping within pairs suggests that contingent reciprocity may have been an important mechanism in the evolution of altruism in chimpanzees. However, correlational analyses of the cumulative pattern of interactions over time do not demonstrate that helping is contingent upon previous acts of altruism, as required by the theory of reciprocal altruism. Experimental studies provide a controlled approach to examine the importance of contingency in helping interactions. In this study, we evaluated whether chimpanzees would be more likely to provide food to a social partner from their home group if their partner had previously provided food for them. The chimpanzees manipulated a barpull apparatus in which actors could deliver rewards either to themselves and their partners or only to themselves. Our findings indicate that the chimpanzees’ responses were not consistently influenced by the behavior of their partners in previous rounds. Only one of the 11 dyads that we tested demonstrated positive reciprocity. We conclude that contingent reciprocity does not spontaneously arise in experimental settings, despite the fact that patterns of behavior in the field indicate that individuals cooperate preferentially with reciprocating partners.     

Take it or leave it for something better? Responses to fair offers in ultimatum bargaining

We investigated if responders accept a 50–50 split in a modified version of the ultimatum game, in which rejection yields a higher payoff (€7) than accepting the equal offer (€5). Therefore, the decision to accept the 50–50 split in this modified ultimatum game cannot be perceived as a self-interest act, as opposed to the standard game, in which acceptance may reflect resignation in the knowledge that the equal split is the best one can expect. A substantial proportion of responders accepts the equal split in this modified game (Study 1), which clearly establishes egalitarian preferences. Further studies show that the willingness to accept is not an artifact of indifference towards the extra payoff (Study 2), but reflects true concerns for proposers’ outcomes (Study 3).     

墨子音乐美学思想探微

墨子是小手工业者和小生产者的代表,却是一位卓越人物。其博大精深的学术思想、强国谋略、治世之法对后世影响至深,他所提出的以“兼爱、非命”为中心思想体系的学说可与儒家学说“仁义、礼乐”相媲美。墨子的音乐美学思想是其学说中的一个重要部分,也是我国古代音乐宝库中一颗璀璨的明珠,文章从墨子背景谈起,着重论述了墨子的音乐美学思想的内容,以及与“节用”的经济学说和“兼以易别”、“禁恶而劝爱”的政治思想的关系,从而进一步丰富、完善了墨子音乐美学思想的内涵。     

Evolutionary consumption

An overview of the field of evolutionary consumption is provided. Brief summaries of disciplines within the evolutionary behavioral sciences that preceded evolutionary psychology (EP) are first offered. This is followed by a discussion of important EP principles including the domain-specificity of the human mind, and the difference between ultimate and proximate scientific explanations. The evolutionary bases of memory, attitude formation/change, emotions, perception (our five senses), personality, and decision making are addressed next, along with specific links to consumer research. Next, I demonstrate how numerous consumer acts could be classified into one of four basal Darwinian modules: survival, reproduction (mating), kin selection, and reciprocal altruism. The paper continues with an exploration of the evolutionary roots of cultural products (e.g., song lyrics) and Darwinian happiness (along with the evolutionary etiology of maladaptive phenomena such as pathological gambling and compulsive buying). I conclude with a discussion of key epistemological benefits of Darwinizing consumer research including greater consilience, increased interdisciplinarity, and an ethos of methodological pluralism.     

What makes people cooperate? Individual differences in BAS/BIS predict strategic reciprocation in a public goods game

Heterogeneity in contribution levels within public goods games (PGGs) is indicative of individual self- or other-regarding preferences. Reward and punishment mechanisms have been demonstrated to affect contributions in the PGGs. This paper examines whether dispositional sensitivities to rewards and punishments (BIS and BAS) explain some behavioural heterogeneity in PGGs. Seventy-two participants took part in a sequential PGG, in which, prior to making a decision about contributing, participants received information about how much their co-players had donated, which was manipulated either as high or low. They also completed the Carver and White BIS/BAS scales. Participants contributed more when other members of their group contributed a high proportion of the initial endowment and less when others gave a low amount. When participants knew that their group members had contributed a high amount, BAS Reward Responsiveness was significantly negatively correlated with the contribution levels, while BIS-anxiety was positively related to a lower proportion of zero contributions. The findings are interpreted in relation to strategic responding in the PGGs. Motivational traits, such as those conceptualized in Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory, are proposed to underlie pro-social behavioural preferences.     

Low ranks make the difference: How achievement goals and ranking information affect cooperation intentions

This investigation tested the joint effect of achievement goals and ranking information on information exchange intentions with a commensurate exchange partner. Results showed that individuals with performance goals were less inclined to cooperate with an exchange partner when they had low or high ranks, relative to when they had intermediate ranks. In contrast, mastery goal individuals showed weaker cooperation intentions when their ranks were higher. Moreover, participants’ reciprocity orientation was found to mediate this interaction effect of achievement goals and ranking information. These findings suggest that mastery goals are more beneficial for exchange relationships than performance goals in terms of stronger reciprocity orientation and cooperation intentions, but only among low-ranked individuals.     

Closeness, support and reciprocity: a study of attachment styles in adolescence

In the context of boarding schools, the transactions between adolescents internal working models of self and others, their peers perceptions of them, as well as the reciprocity between perceptions of others and by others were explored. Findings supported the assumed effect of models of the other on a persons social environment, as well as the expected relations between the congruency of models of self and other and the actual reciprocity between perceptions of others and others perceptions of self. Patterns of reciprocity in interpersonal relationships were found to characterize secure (positive reciprocity) and fearful (negative reciprocity) attachment styles, while non-reciprocal relations appeared more frequently among preoccupied and dismissing persons. These findings suggest specific person-environment transactions that may be involved in securing the continuity of styles of relating.     

FREE SPEECH

Recognition of the harms done by free speech is a function of the social ontology presupposed. An atomist ontology implies that the harms suffered are restricted to individual people. This paper suggests an alternate ontology—one that describes systems established by the causal reciprocities of their proper parts. It proposes a consequentialist moral theory, and considers the harms suffered by these systems (a) when speech exposes their internal, otherwise private, behaviors or features, (b) when speech is malicious and false, and (c) when speech is monopolistic. Does the proposed ontology have objectionable implications for public policy? Alternative answers are considered briefly.     

Reactions toward an unexpected or counternormative favor-giver: Does it matter if we think we can reciprocate?

People may experience two opposing motivations after receiving unexpected or counternormative favors: an obligation to reciprocate and psychological reactance. We investigated whether awareness of a future opportunity to reciprocate might affect which reaction would ultimately guide reciprocity behavior. Participants received a generous payment from a “supervisor.” This favor was either expected or unexpected and either normative or counternormative. Recipients were either aware or unaware of a future chance to reciprocate. As predicted, unaware participants demonstrated reactance by reciprocating less when the favor was unexpected or counternormative, whereas aware participants demonstrated obligation by reciprocating more under those circumstances. Participants’ evaluations of the supervisor suggested that people have mixed impressions of someone whose favors violate expectancies or norms.