THE IMPACT OF VERBAL COMMUNICATION ON THE DYNAMICS OF MALE GROUP COOPERATION (STUDY IN BURYATS OF SOUTHERN SIBERIA)
DOI: 10.23951/2307-6119-2020-2-127-140
Here we report on the results of the experimental study investigating an impact of verbal communication on male group cooperation. The coevolution of cooperation and verbal communication makes up a special interest within evolutionary anthropology, since Homo sapiens is distinguished by outstanding cooperative and communicative (language) abilities. Male cooperation is of particular interest. Historically emerged so that activities, which require high group-cooperation skills (warfare, big-game hunting), are predominantly or exclusively male occupations. Maintaining high level of cooperation among males, in contrast to females, was also encouraged by widely spread patrilocality tradition, meaning that males were closely genetically related with each other during the whole life-span (a powerful factor for enhancement of cooperation according to Hamilton’s kin-selection theory). Participants of our study were young men of Mongolian origin (Buryats of Southern Siberia), whose traditional culture involved nomadic pastoralism and patrilocality. Individual predispositions for pro-social behavior were assessed via group cooperation game – “Public Goods Game”, which was played in groups of four participants, under condition of the “face-to-face” interactions. In this game each participant was asked to decide how much of his own funds (real monetary equivalents were given to his disposal by the experimenter) he was willing to invest into a “common project” (not invested funds were kept by a participant). The sum of investments into “common project” was then doubled and distributed equally between all four group members. This game allows estimating individual predispositions for cooperation, cheating, and altruistic behavior. The experiment was conducted in 2 rounds: (1) under condition of absence of any intentional communication between participants; (2) with verbal negotiations option. Worth noting that all investment decisions in both rounds were made privily, so that other group members had no information on investments of their partners (even despite any verbal agreements in the second round). Our results have demonstrated that verbal communication has a crucial positive impact on cooperative behavior, shifts individual behavior towards maximizing group benefits as opposed to immediate personal gain. Increased individual verbal expressiveness was characteristic of highly pro-socially oriented subjects. However a small fraction of our participants was characterized by anti-social behavior (employing cheating strategy), and these subjects were even more talkative than others. This result suggests that cheaters have applied exaggerated (supernatural) stimulus to build own trustworthiness in a group, which is a prerequisite of successful cheating. The results are discussed from evolutionary perspective.
Keywords: cooperation, communication, verbal communication, Public Goods Game, altruism, Buryats, human evolution
References:
Abaeva L. L., Zhukovskaya N. L. Buryaty [Buryats] / Abaeva L.L., Zhukovskaya N.L. (eds.). Institut etnologii i antropologii im. N.N. Miklukho-Maklaya. – М.: Nauka, 2004. (in Russian)
Basaeva K. D. Sem'ya i brak u buryat (vtoraya polovina XIX – nachalo XX veka) [Family and marriage in Buryats (second half of XIX – the beginning of the XX century]. – Novosibirsk: Nauka, 1980. (in Russian)
Butovskaya M. L. Yazyk tela: priroda i kul'tura [Body language: nature and culture]. – М.: Nauchnyi mir, 2004. (in Russian)
Dashieva N. B. Traditsionnye obshchestvennye prazdniki buryat: istoriya i tipologii [Traditional public holidays of Buryats: history and typologies] / Sokolova P. (ed.). – М.; Ulan-Ude: Izd.-poligr. kompleks FGBOU VPO VSGAKI, 2012. (in Russian)
Zorina Z. A., Poletaeva I. I., Reznikova Z. I. Osnovy etologii i genetiki povedeniya [Basics of ethology and behavioral genetics]. Uchebnik. 2-eizd. – M.: Izd-vo MGU, 2002. (in Russian)
Kropotkin P.A. Vzaimnaya pomoshch', kak faktor evolyutsii [Mutual help as a factor of evolution]. SPb.: Izd. «Znanie», 1907. (in Russian)
Naumov N. P. Biologicheskie (signal'nye) polya i ikh znachenie v zhizni mlekopitayushchikh [Biological (signal) fields and their role in mammalian life] // Uspekhi sovremennoi teriologii [Achievements of modern theriology] / Sokolov V.E. (ed.) – М.: Nauka, 1977. – P. 93–110. (in Russian)
Efroimson V. P. Rodoslovnaya al'truizma (Etika s pozitsii evolyutsionnoi genetiki cheloveka) [The genealogy of altruism (Ethics from the standpoint of evolutionary human genetics)] // Novyi mir [New world]. – 1971. – Vol. 10. – P. 193–213. (in Russian)
Avilés L. Solving the freeloaders paradox: genetic associations and frequency-dependent selection in the evolution of cooperation among nonrelatives //Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. – 2002. – Vol. 99(22). – P. 14268–14273.
Axelrod R., Hamilton W. D. The evolution of cooperation // Science. – 1981. – Vol. 211(4489). – P. 1390–1396.
Baeckens S. Evolution of animal chemical communication: Insights from non-model species and phylogenetic comparative methods // Belgian journal of zoology. – 2019. – Vol. 149(1). – P. 63–93.
Baker M. Is there a reproducibility crisis? A Nature survey lifts the lid on how researchers view the'crisis rocking science and what they think will help // Nature. – 2016. – Vol. 533(7604). – P. 452–455.
Balliet D. Communication and cooperation in social dilemmas: A meta-analytic review // Journal of Conflict Resolution. – 2010. – Vol. 54(1) – P. 39–57.
Balliet D., Li N. P., Macfarlan S. J., van Vugt M. Sex differences in cooperation: a meta-analytic review of social dilemmas // Psychological bulletin. – 2011. – Vol. 137(6). – P. 881.
Barrett D. Supernormal stimuli: How primal urges overran their evolutionary purpose. – WW Norton & Company, 2010. – 224 pp.
Bielert C., Anderson C. M. Baboon sexual swellings and male response: a possible operational mammalian supernormal stimulus and response interaction // International Journal of Primatology. – 1985. – Vol. 6(4). – P. 377–393.
Boyd R., Richerson P. J. The evolution of indirect reciprocity // Social Networks. – 1989. – Vol. 11(3). – P. 213–236.
Burkart J. M., Allon O., Amici F., Fichtel C., Finkenwirth C., Heschl A., Huber J., Isler K., Kosonen Z. K., Martins E., Meulman E.J., Richiger R., Rueth K., Spillmann B., Wiesendanger S., van Schaik C. P. The evolutionary origin of human hyper-cooperation // Nature communications. – 2014. – Vol. 5. – P. 4747.
Costa M., Corazza L. Aesthetic phenomena as supernormal stimuli: The case of eye, lip, and lower-face size and roundness in artistic portraits // Perception. – 2006. – Vol. 35(2). – P. 229–246.
Dawkins R., Krebs J. R. Arms races between and within species // Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B. Biological Sciences. – 1979. – Vol. 205(1161). – P. 489–511.
Dorrough A. R., Glöckner A. A cross‐national analysis of sex differences in prisoner's dilemma games // British Journal of Social Psychology. – 2019. – Vol. 58(1). – P. 225–240.
Dunbar R. Theory of mind and the evolution of language // Approaches to the Evolution of Language. – 1998. – P. 92–110.
Gelcich S., Guzman R., Rodríguez-Sickert C., Castilla J. C., Cárdenas J. C. Exploring external validity of common pool resource experiments: insights from artisanal benthic fisheries in Chile // Ecology and Society. – 2013. – Vol. 18(3). – P. 2.
Gilbert O. M., Foster K. R., Mehdiabadi N. J., Strassmann J. E., Queller D. C. High relatedness maintains multicellular cooperation in a social amoeba by controlling cheater mutants // Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. – 2007. –Vol. 104(21). – P. 8913–8917.
Gintis H. Strong reciprocity and human sociality // Journal of theoretical biology. – 2000. – Vol. 206(2). – P. 169–179.
Gintis H., Smith E. A., Bowles S. Costly signaling and cooperation // Journal of theoretical biology. – 2001. – Vol. 213(1). – P. 103–119.
Fischbacher U., Gächter S., Fehr E. Are people conditionally cooperative? Evidence from a public goods experiment // Economics letters. – 2001. – Vol. 71(3). – P. 397–404.
Fischbacher U., Gächter S., Quercia S. The behavioral validity of the strategy method in public good experiments // Journal of Economic Psychology. – 2012. – Vol. 33(4). – P. 897–913.
Fehr E., Fischbacher U., Gächter S. Strong reciprocity, human cooperation, and the enforcement of social norms // Human nature. – 2002. – Vol. 13(1). – P. 1–25.
Flack J.C., de Waal F. Context modulates signal meaning in primate communication. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. – 2007. – Vol. 104(5). – P. 1581–1586.
Hauser M. D. The evolution of communication. – Cambridge, MA, US: The MIT Press. – 1996.
Heino M., Metz J. A. J., Kaitala V. The enigma of frequency-dependent selection // Trends in Ecology & Evolution. – 1998. – Vol. 13(9). – P. 367–370.
Henrich J., Heine S. J., Norenzayan A. The weirdest people in the world? // Behavioral and brain sciences. – 2010. – Vol. 33(2-3). – P. 61–83.
Herbst D., Mas A. Peer effects on worker output in the laboratory generalize to the field // Science. – 2015. – Vol. 350(6260). – P. 545–549.
Hamilton W. D. The genetical evolution of social behaviour. II // Journal of theoretical biology. – 1964. – Vol. 7(1). – P. 17–52.
Jaffe K., Mirás B., Cabrera A. Mate selection in the moth Neoleucinodes elegantalis: evidence for a supernormal chemical stimulus in sexual attraction // Animal Behaviour. – 2007. – Vol. 73(4). – P. 727–734.
Kocher M. G., Cherry T. K., Stephan N. R. J., Sutter M. Conditional cooperation on three continents // Economics letters. – 2008. – Vol. 101(3). – P. 175–178.
Kral K. Implications of insect responses to supernormal visual releasing stimuli in intersexual communication and ower-visiting behaviour: A review // European Journal of Entomology. – 2016. – Vol. 113. – P. 429–437.
Kurzban R., Houser D. Experiments investigating cooperative types in humans: A complement to evolutionary theory and simulations // Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. – 2005. – Vol. 102(5). – P. 1803–1807.
Li S.I., Purugganan M. D. The cooperative amoeba: Dictyostelium as a model for social evolution // Trends in Genetics. – 2011. – Vol. 27(2). – P. 48–54.
Maynard Smith J. Evolution and the theory of games // American Scientist. – 1976. – Vol. 64(1). – P. 41–45.
Maynard Smith J. Evolution and the Theory of Games. – Cambridge University Press, 1982.
Micheletti A. J. C., Ruxton G. D., Gardner A. Intrafamily and intragenomic conflicts in human warfare // Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. – 2017. – Vol. 284(1849). – P. 20162699.
Morris P. H., White J., Morrison, E.R., Fisher K. High heels as supernormal stimuli: How wearing high heels affects judgements of female attractiveness // Evolution and Human Behavior. – 2013. – Vol. 34(3). – P. 176–181.
Nowak M. A. Five rules for the evolution of cooperation // Science. – 2006. – Vol. 314(5805). – P. 1560–1563.
Nowak M. A., Tarnita C. E., Wilson E. O. The evolution of eusociality // Nature. – 2010. – Vol. 466(7310). – P. 1057.
Pan L., Hao D., Rong Z., Zhou T. Zero-determinant strategies in iterated public goods game // Scientific reports. – 2015. – Vol. 5. – P. 13096.
Parr L. A., Waller B. M. Understanding chimpanzee facial expression: insights into the evolution of communication // Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience – 2006. – Vol. 1(3). – P. 221–228.
Pazhoohi F., Macedo A. F., Doyle J. F., Arantes J. Waist-to-Hip Ratio as Supernormal Stimuli: Effect of Contrapposto Pose and Viewing Angle // Archives of Sexual Behavior. – 2017. – P. 1–11.
Peysakhovich A., Nowak M. A., Rand D. G. Humans display a ‘cooperative phenotype’ that is domain general and temporally stable // Nature communications. – 2014. – Vol. 5. – P. 4939.
Rapoport A., Chammah A. M., Orwant C. J. Prisoner's dilemma: A study in conflict and cooperation. – University of Michigan press, 1965. – Vol. 165.
Sparks A., Burleigh T., Barclay P. We can see inside: Accurate prediction of Prisoner's Dilemma decisions in announced games following a face-to-face interaction // Evolution and Human Behavior. – 2016. – Vol. 37(3). – P. 210–216.
Staddon J. E. R. A note on the evolutionary significance of "supernormal" stimuli // The American Naturalist. – 1975. – Vol. 109(969). – P. 541–545.
Taga M. E., Bassler B. L. Chemical communication among bacteria // Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. – 2003. – Vol. 100(2). – P. 14549–14554.
Tinbergen N. Social releasers and the experimental method required for their study // The Wilson Bulletin. – 1948. – P. 6–51.
Tinbergen, N. The study of instinct. New York, NY, US: Clarendon Press/ Oxford University Press. – 1951.
Tinbergen N., Perdeck A.C. On the stimulus situation releasing the begging response in the newly hatched Herring Gull chick (Larus argentatus argentatus Pont.) // Behaviour. – 1950. – P. 1–39.
Traulsen A., Nowak M. A. Evolution of cooperation by multilevel selection // Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. – 2006. – Vol. 103(29). – P. 10952–10955.
Trivers, R. L. The evolution of reciprocal altruism // The Quarterly review of biology. – 1971. – Vol. 46(1). – P. 35–57.
Volk S., Thöni C., Ruigrok W. Temporal stability and psychological foundations of cooperation preferences // Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization. – 2012. – Vol. 81(2). – P. 664–676.
Vugt M., Cremer D. D., Janssen D. P. Gender differences in cooperation and competition: The male-warrior hypothesis // Psychological science. – 2007. – Vol. 18(1). – P. 19–23.
Wacewicz S., Żywiczyński P. Language origins // Interaction Studies. – 2018. – Vol. 19(1-2). – P. 167–182.
Wiley R. H. The evolution of communication: information and manipulation // Animal behaviour. – 1983. – Vol. 2. – P. 156–189.
( 968.46 kB ) 
( 926.94 kB )
Issue: 2, 2020
Series of issue: Issue 2
Rubric: ANTHROPOLOGY
Pages: 127 — 140
Downloads: 1021