Abstract
AbstractWhether intergroup conflict is a necessary condition for the evolution of human prosociality has been a matter of debate. At the center of the debate is the coevolutionary model of parochial altruism—that human cooperation with in-group members has coevolved with aggression toward out-group members. Studies using the intergroup prisoner’s dilemma–maximizing difference game to test the model have repeatedly shown that people do not exhibit out-group aggression, possibly because of an inappropriate operationalization and framing of out-group aggression. The coevolutionary model predicts out-group aggression when the actor understands that it will lead to the in-group’s benefit. However, in the game, such an aspect of out-group aggression that benefits the in-group is typically not well communicated to participants. Thus, this study tested the hypothesis that out-group aggression in the game would be promoted by a framing that emphasizes that attacking out-group members enhances the in-group’s gain. Results of two laboratory experiments with 176 Japanese university students in total showed that such a framing did not promote out-group aggression and individuals invested more money to cooperate with in-group members only, avoiding the strategy of cooperating with in-group members to harm out-group members. These results do not support the coevolutionary model.
Funder
Japan Society for the Promotion of Science
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference84 articles.
1. Brown, D. E. Human Universals (McGrew-Hill, 1991).
2. Gat, A. War in Human Civilization (Oxford University Press, 2006).
3. Sumner, W. G. Folkways (Ginn, 1906).
4. Kestnbaum, M. Sociology of war and the military. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 35, 235–254. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-070308-120004 (2009).
5. Schelling, T. C. Strategy of Conflict (Harvard University Press, 1980).
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献