A Hypothesis of the Co-evolution of Cooperation and Responses to Inequity

Recent evidence demonstrates that humans are not the only species to respond negatively to inequitable outcomes which are to their disadvantage. Several species respond negatively if they subsequently receive a less good reward than a social partner for completing the same task. While these studies suggest that the negative response to inequity is not a uniquely human behavior, they do not provide a functional explanation for the emergence of these responses due to similar characteristics among these species. However, emerging data support the hypothesis that an aversion to inequity is a mechanism to promote successful long-term cooperative relationships amongst non-kin. In this paper, I discuss several converging lines of evidence which illustrate the need to further evaluate this relationship. First, cooperation can survive modest inequity; in explicitly cooperative interactions, individuals are willing to continue to cooperate despite inequitable outcomes as long as the partner's overall behavior is equitable. Second, the context of inequity affects reactions to it in ways which support the idea that joint efforts lead to an expectation of joint payoffs. Finally, comparative studies indicate a link between the degree and extent of cooperation between unrelated individuals in a species and that species’ response to inequitable outcomes. This latter line of evidence indicates that this behavior evolved in conjunction with cooperation and may represent an adaptation to increase the payoffs associated with cooperative interactions. Together these data inform a testable working hypothesis for understanding decision-making in the context of inequity and provide a new, comparative framework for evaluating decision-making behavior

Knowing me, knowing you: perspectives on awareness in autism

Purpose: This paper raises important questions from the different perspectives on autism research that arose from a seminar on autism and technology, held as part of an ESRC-funded series on innovative technologies for autism. Design/methodology/approach: The paper focuses on the roles of technology in understanding questions about different perspectives on autism: how do people on the spectrum see neurotypicals (people without autism) and vice versa?; how do we use eye-gaze differently from each other?; how might technology influence what is looked at and how we measure this?; what differences might there be in how people use imitation of others?; and finally, how should we study and treat any differences? Findings: We synthesise common themes from invited talks and responses. The audience discussions highlighted the ways in which we take account of human variation, how we can understand the perspective of another, particularly across third-person and second-person approaches in research, and how researchers and stakeholders engage with each other. Originality/value: We argue that the question of perspectives is important for considering how people with autism and neurotypical people interact in everyday contexts, and how researchers frame their research questions and methods. We propose that stakeholders and researchers can fruitfully engage directly in discussions of research, in ways that benefit both research and practice

An Evolutionary Perspective on Morality

Moral behavior and concern for others are sometimes argued to set humans apart from other species. However, there is some evidence that humans are not the only animal species to possess these characteristics. Work from behavioral biology and neuroscience has indicated that some of these traits are present in other species, including other primates. Studying these behaviors in other species can inform us about the evolutionary trajectory of morality, either helping understand how the behaviors evolved and which environmental characteristics were critical for their emergence. While this evolutionary approach to human behavior is not always well received, a brief historical look indicates that this has not always been the case. For instance Adam Smith, better known for his economics than his natural history, was clearly sympathetic with the view that moral behaviors are present in species other than humans. This paper focuses on how individuals respond to inequity, which is related to moral behavior. Recent evidence shows that nonhuman primates distinguish between inequitable and equitable outcomes. However, this is primarily in situations in which inequity hurts the self (e.g. disadvantageous inequity) rather than another (e.g. advantageous inequity). Studying such responses can help us understand the evolutionary basis of moral behavior, which increases our understanding of how our own morality emerged

What do Capuchin Monkeys Tell Us about Cooperation?

Nature may be red in tooth and claw, but working together with one’s group mates can be an efficient way to increase fitness. Cooperation is common, for example, among capuchin monkeys. These monkeys are not only willing to help others obtain resources, but are more likely to share with individuals who help them. Cooperation can be risky, however, and not surprisingly capuchins are much less likely to cooperate when a partner is able to monopolize the reward. However, they also pay attention to the partner’s behavior; monkeys who share with their partners promote successful cooperation, and thus actually receive more benefits over the long term than those who always claim the best rewards for themselves. The ability to recognize inequity may be a mechanism by which the monkeys determine which partners are the best collaborators. The study of capuchin monkeys can tell us quite a lot about how, when, and with whom to cooperate, perhaps providing insight in to the design and implementation of our own human cooperative institutions

Property in Non-human Primates

Property is rare in most nonhuman primates, most likely because their lifestyles are not conducive to it. Nonetheless, just because these species do not frequently maintain property does not mean that they lack the propensity to do so. Primates show respect for possession, as well as behaviors related to property, such as irrational decision making regarding property (e.g. the endowment effect) and barter. The limiting factor in species other than humans is likely the lack of social and institutional controls for maintaining property. By comparing primates and humans, we gain a better understanding of how human property concepts have evolved

Introduction to “Justice in Animals”

Although much is known about humans’ responses to inequity, little is known about similar responses in other species. The goal of these issues is to bring together researchers focusing on both humans and non-humans to provide a synthesis of our knowledge of non-human responses to inequity to date, and what these data tell us about the evolution of humans’ responses. In this Introduction, I provide a brief background, highlighting both areas in which differences among the related literatures emerge and the ways in which the comparative approach can provide insight in to this question. As becomes clear in these issues, we have reached the point where we can move beyond documenting these responses in other species and develop research programs combining both human and non-human perspectives to better understand the evolution of fairness and justice

Animal Behavior: The Right Tool for the Job

A recent discovery that wild capuchins choose a functionally appropriate tool from a set of apparently similar tools casts new light on our understanding of how animals understand complex tasks

Justice- and Fairness-related Behaviors in Non-human Primates

A distinctive feature across human societies is our interest in justice and fairness. People will sometimes invest in extremely costly behavior in order to achieve fair outcomes for themselves and others. Why do people care so much about justice? One way to address this is comparatively, exploring behaviors related to justice and fairness in other species. In this paper, I review work exploring responses to inequity, prosocial behavior, and other relevant behaviors in non-human primates in an effort to understand both the potential evolutionary function of these behaviors and the social and ecological reasons for the individual differences in behavior. I also consider how these behaviors relate to human behavior, particularly in the case of experimental studies using games derived from experimental economics to compare non-human primates’ responses to those of humans in similar experimental conditions. These results emphasize the importance of a comparative approach in order to better understand the function and diversity of human behavior

Behavioral Development: Timing is Everything

Paedomorphism can be a mechanism for differentiation between species. Here the authors demonstrate that bonobos take longer to reach adult levels of two behaviors than do chimpanzees, providing an empirical demonstration of this hypothesis among our closest relatives

A Hypothesis of the Co-Evolution of Cooperation and Inequity

Recent evidence demonstrates that humans are not the only species to respond negatively to inequitable outcomes which are to their disadvantage. Several species respond negatively if they subsequently receive a less good reward than a social partner for completing the same task. While these studies suggest that the negative response to inequity is not a uniquely human behavior, they do not provide a functional explanation for the emergence of these responses due to similar characteristics among these species. However, emerging data support the hypothesis that an aversion to inequity is a mechanism to promote successful long-term cooperative relationships amongst non-kin. In this paper, I discuss several converging lines of evidence which illustrate the need to further evaluate this relationship. First, cooperation can survive modest inequity; in explicitly cooperative interactions, individuals are willing to continue to cooperate despite inequitable outcomes as long as the partner’s overall behavior is equitable. Second, the context of inequity affects reactions to it in ways which support the idea that joint efforts lead to an expectation of joint payoffs. Finally, comparative studies indicate a link between the degree and extent of cooperation between unrelated individuals in a species and that species’ response to inequitable outcomes. This latter line of evidence indicates that this behavior evolved in conjunction with cooperation and may represent an adaptation to increase the payoffs associated with cooperative interactions. Together these data inform a testable working hypothesis for understanding decision-making in the context of inequity and provide a new, comparative framework for evaluating decision-making behavior