An official website of the United States government
Abstract Reciprocally patterned behavior is widespread in animals in the wild, but experimental evidence has been frustratingly inconsistent. Contrary to earlier contentions that this inconsistency is because reciprocity in non‐human species is a rare or fragile effect, recent authors have argued that the evidence suggests that reciprocity is widespread, that it often relies on cognitive mechanisms that are common across species, and is potentially an important factor in animals' daily lives. Another possible explanation for its apparent rarity, then, is that due to experimental studies' (intentionally) structured environment, they can lack the appropriate context to promote and support reciprocity. Focusing on outcomes from experimental reciprocal tasks in non‐human primates, I consider several factors that may be important, including the identity of the interactors and their relationship to one another, whether there is free choice of partners, whether the individuals are interacting directly, the timing of the interaction, the commodity involved, whether individuals have a reason to reciprocate, and the equity of the interaction. Clarifying the role of each of these factors will help improve experimental tasks and the social and ecological contexts that promote reciprocity.
more »
« less
Reciprocity versus pseudo‐reciprocity: A false dichotomy
Abstract Reciprocity and pseudo‐reciprocity are two important models for the evolution of cooperation and often considered alternative hypotheses. Reciprocity is typically defined as a scenario where help givencauseshelp received: cooperation is stabilized because each actor's cooperative investments are conditional on the cooperative returns from the receiver. Pseudo‐reciprocity is a scenario where helpenablesbyproduct returns: cooperation is inherently stable because the actor's cooperative investments yield byproduct returns from the receiver's self‐serving behavior. These models are strict alternatives only if reciprocity is defined by the restrictive assumption of zerofitness interdependence, meaning that the helper has no “stake” in the receiver's fitness. Reciprocity and interdependence are, however, not mutually exclusive when helping can increase both reciprocal help and byproduct returns. For instance, helping partners survive can simultaneously increase their willingness to reciprocate, their ability to reciprocate, and byproduct benefits of their existence. Interdependence can “pave the road” to reciprocal helping, and partners who reciprocate help can also become interdependent. However, larger cooperative investments can increase the need for responsiveness to partner returns. Therefore, most long‐term cooperative relationships involve both responsiveness and interdependence. Categorizing these relationships as “reciprocity” can be viewed as ignoring interdependence, but calling them ‘pseudo‐reciprocity’ is confusing because stability also comes from the cooperative investments being conditional on returns. Rather than conceptualizing cooperation intodiscrete categories, it is more insightful to imagine a coordinate system with responsiveness and interdependence ascontinuous dimensions. One can ask: To what degree is helping behavior responsive to the partner's behavior? And to what degree does the helper inherently benefit from the receiver's survival or reproduction? The amounts of responsiveness and interdependence will often be hard to estimate, but both are unlikely to be zero. Identifying their relative importance, and how that changes over time, would greatly clarify the nature of cooperative relationships.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2015928
- PAR ID:
- 10482536
- Publisher / Repository:
- Wiley-Blackwell
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Ethology
- Volume:
- 130
- Issue:
- 4
- ISSN:
- 0179-1613
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Abstract The function of cooperative traits can change over time. For example, helping behaviors that originally evolved by kin selection can later yield direct fitness benefits and be stabilized by partner choice. In such cases, there may be multiple interacting factors that drive cooperation. Here, I review evidence that food sharing in vampire bats evolved as form of extended maternal care that was co‐opted to yield reciprocal benefits, and that such reciprocal relationships may have led to investment strategies that balance the trade‐offs between greater quality and quantity of cooperative relationships.more » « less
-
Spatial assortment can be both a cause and a consequence of cooperation. Proximity promotes cooperation when individuals preferentially help nearby partners, and conversely, cooperation drives proximity when individuals move towards more cooperative partners. However, these two causal directions are difficult to distinguish with observational data. Here, we experimentally test if forcing randomly selected pairs of equally familiar female common vampire bats ( Desmodus rotundus ) into close spatial proximity promotes the formation of enduring cooperative relationships. Over 114 days, we sampled 682 h of interactions among 21 females captured from three distant sites to track daily allogrooming rates over time. We compared these rates before, during and after a one-week period, during which we caged random triads of previously unfamiliar and unrelated vampire bats in proximity. After the week of proximity when all bats could again freely associate, the allogrooming rates of pairs forced into proximity increased more than those of the 126 control pairs. This work is the first to experimentally demonstrate the causal effect of repeated interactions on cooperative investments in vampire bats. Future work should determine the relative importance of mere association versus interactions (e.g. reciprocal allogrooming) in shaping social preferences.more » « less
-
Reciprocity, or the tendency of individuals to mirror behavior, is a key measure that de- scribes information exchange in a social network. Users in social networks tend to engage in different levels of reciprocal behavior. Differences in such behavior may indicate the existence of communities that reciprocate links at varying rates. In this paper, we de- velop methodology to model the diverse reciprocal behavior in growing social networks. In particular, we present a preferential attachment model with heterogeneous reciprocity that imitates the attraction users have for popular users, plus the heterogeneous nature by which they reciprocate links. We compare Bayesian and frequentist model fitting techniques for large networks, as well as computationally efficient variational alternatives. Cases where the number of communities is known and unknown are both considered. We apply the presented methods to the analysis of Facebook and Reddit networks where users have non- uniform reciprocal behavior patterns. The fitted model captures the heavy-tailed nature of the empirical degree distributions in the datasets and identifies multiple groups of users that differ in their tendency to reply to and receive responses to wallposts and comments.more » « less
-
Across human societies, women's economic production and their contributions to childcare are critical in supporting reproductive fitness for themselves, their spouses and children. Yet, the necessity of performing both work and childcare tasks presents women with an adaptive problem in which they must determine how best to allocate their time and energy between these tasks. Women often use cooperative relationships with alloparents to solve this problem, but whether or not women cooperate across different domains (e.g. work and childcare) to access alloparents remains relatively under-explored. Using social network data collected with Shodagor households in Bangladesh, we show that women who need childcare help in order to work draw on cooperative work partners as potential alloparents, and that all women rely heavily on kin, but not reciprocal cooperation for childcare help. These results indicate that Shodagor women strategize to create work and childcare relationships in ways that help solve the adaptive problem they face. We discuss the implications of our results and the example provided by Shodagor women for a broader understanding of women's cooperative relationships, including the importance of socio-ecological circumstances and gendered divisions of labour in shaping women's cooperative strategies.This article is part of the theme issue ‘Cooperation among women: evolutionary and cross-cultural perspectives’.more » « less
