Parochial reciprocity

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningfagfællebedømt

Standard

Parochial reciprocity. / Columbus, Simon; Thielmann, Isabel; Zettler, Ingo; Böhm, Robert.

I: Evolution and Human Behavior, Bind 44, Nr. 2, 2023, s. 131-139.

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningfagfællebedømt

Harvard

Columbus, S, Thielmann, I, Zettler, I & Böhm, R 2023, 'Parochial reciprocity', Evolution and Human Behavior, bind 44, nr. 2, s. 131-139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2023.02.001

APA

Columbus, S., Thielmann, I., Zettler, I., & Böhm, R. (2023). Parochial reciprocity. Evolution and Human Behavior, 44(2), 131-139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2023.02.001

Vancouver

Columbus S, Thielmann I, Zettler I, Böhm R. Parochial reciprocity. Evolution and Human Behavior. 2023;44(2):131-139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2023.02.001

Author

Columbus, Simon ; Thielmann, Isabel ; Zettler, Ingo ; Böhm, Robert. / Parochial reciprocity. I: Evolution and Human Behavior. 2023 ; Bind 44, Nr. 2. s. 131-139.

Bibtex

@article{636e729433734b1288db75cffeaa8c97,
title = "Parochial reciprocity",
abstract = "Parochial altruism suggests that humans are intrinsically motivated to harm out-groups, and that this is tightly connected to a preference for benefitting their in-group. Yet, there is little evidence for the kind of unconditional out-group harm suggested by this account, nor for the assertion that it would be associated with in-group cooperation. Instead, humans selectively reciprocate actual, but also potential aggression. We therefore posit a model of parochial reciprocity, according to which individuals retaliate against actual and anticipated harms to their in-group. To test predictions arising from these competing accounts, we manipulated out-group threats and elicited preferences for the welfare of in-group and out-group members, as well as beliefs about in-group and out-group members' behaviours in an incentivised intergroup conflict game with natural groups (online sample; N = 973). In this game, individuals could pay to benefit their in-group, but had the option to additionally harm the out-group without incurring any further costs. Individuals who valued their in-group more strongly were no more likely to harm the out-group, thus contradicting parochial altruism. Instead, individuals who expected the out-group to harm their in-group preemptively retaliated the anticipated attack. Importantly, they only did so when the out-group posed an actual threat to the in-group. Taken together, the findings suggest that participation in intergroup conflict is better explained by parochial reciprocity than purely by group-based preferences.",
keywords = "Intergroup conflict, IPD-MD, Parochial altruism, Reciprocity, Social preferences",
author = "Simon Columbus and Isabel Thielmann and Ingo Zettler and Robert B{\"o}hm",
note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2023 The Authors",
year = "2023",
doi = "10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2023.02.001",
language = "English",
volume = "44",
pages = "131--139",
journal = "Evolution and Human Behavior",
issn = "1090-5138",
publisher = "Elsevier",
number = "2",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Parochial reciprocity

AU - Columbus, Simon

AU - Thielmann, Isabel

AU - Zettler, Ingo

AU - Böhm, Robert

N1 - Publisher Copyright: © 2023 The Authors

PY - 2023

Y1 - 2023

N2 - Parochial altruism suggests that humans are intrinsically motivated to harm out-groups, and that this is tightly connected to a preference for benefitting their in-group. Yet, there is little evidence for the kind of unconditional out-group harm suggested by this account, nor for the assertion that it would be associated with in-group cooperation. Instead, humans selectively reciprocate actual, but also potential aggression. We therefore posit a model of parochial reciprocity, according to which individuals retaliate against actual and anticipated harms to their in-group. To test predictions arising from these competing accounts, we manipulated out-group threats and elicited preferences for the welfare of in-group and out-group members, as well as beliefs about in-group and out-group members' behaviours in an incentivised intergroup conflict game with natural groups (online sample; N = 973). In this game, individuals could pay to benefit their in-group, but had the option to additionally harm the out-group without incurring any further costs. Individuals who valued their in-group more strongly were no more likely to harm the out-group, thus contradicting parochial altruism. Instead, individuals who expected the out-group to harm their in-group preemptively retaliated the anticipated attack. Importantly, they only did so when the out-group posed an actual threat to the in-group. Taken together, the findings suggest that participation in intergroup conflict is better explained by parochial reciprocity than purely by group-based preferences.

AB - Parochial altruism suggests that humans are intrinsically motivated to harm out-groups, and that this is tightly connected to a preference for benefitting their in-group. Yet, there is little evidence for the kind of unconditional out-group harm suggested by this account, nor for the assertion that it would be associated with in-group cooperation. Instead, humans selectively reciprocate actual, but also potential aggression. We therefore posit a model of parochial reciprocity, according to which individuals retaliate against actual and anticipated harms to their in-group. To test predictions arising from these competing accounts, we manipulated out-group threats and elicited preferences for the welfare of in-group and out-group members, as well as beliefs about in-group and out-group members' behaviours in an incentivised intergroup conflict game with natural groups (online sample; N = 973). In this game, individuals could pay to benefit their in-group, but had the option to additionally harm the out-group without incurring any further costs. Individuals who valued their in-group more strongly were no more likely to harm the out-group, thus contradicting parochial altruism. Instead, individuals who expected the out-group to harm their in-group preemptively retaliated the anticipated attack. Importantly, they only did so when the out-group posed an actual threat to the in-group. Taken together, the findings suggest that participation in intergroup conflict is better explained by parochial reciprocity than purely by group-based preferences.

KW - Intergroup conflict

KW - IPD-MD

KW - Parochial altruism

KW - Reciprocity

KW - Social preferences

U2 - 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2023.02.001

DO - 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2023.02.001

M3 - Journal article

AN - SCOPUS:85148957894

VL - 44

SP - 131

EP - 139

JO - Evolution and Human Behavior

JF - Evolution and Human Behavior

SN - 1090-5138

IS - 2

ER -

ID: 339759944