Did warfare among ancestral hunter-gatherers affect the evolution of human social behaviors?

Adversity and cooperation in heterogeneous pairs

This paper provides a game-theoretic model of the effect of higher adversity on the evolution of cooperation. The focus lies on how this effect of higher adversity is impacted when there is transient, non-genetic heterogeneity in the form of differences in the players' capabilities of contributing to the public good, in the benefits they obtain from the public good, or in their cooperation costs. A framework is provided that identifies the common mechanisms that are at work across two models of cooperation (jointly producing a public good, and jointly defending an existing public good), and across the mentioned types of heterogeneity. With relatively small heterogeneity, higher adversity generates a common-enemy effect for large cooperation costs and a deterrence effect for small cooperation costs. Yet, these results on the effect of higher adversity are completely reversed for relatively large heterogeneity.

Acculturation drives the evolution of intergroup conflict

Conflict between groups of individuals is a prevalent feature in human societies. A common theoretical explanation for intergroup conflict is that it provides benefits to individuals within groups in the form of reproduction-enhancing resources, such as food, territory, or mates. However, it is not always the case that conflict results from resource scarcity. Here, we show that intergroup conflict can evolve, despite not providing any benefits to individuals or their groups. The mechanism underlying this process is acculturation: the adoption, through coercion or imitation, of the victor's cultural traits. Acculturation acts as a cultural driver (in analogy to meiotic drivers) favoring the transmission of conflict, despite a potential cost to both the host group as a whole and to individuals in that group. We illustrate this process with a two-level model incorporating state-dependent event rates and evolving traits for both individuals and groups. Individuals can become "warriors" who specialize in intergroup conflicts, but are costly otherwise. Additionally, groups are characterized by cultural traits, such as their tendency to engage in conflict with other groups and their tendency for acculturation. We show that, if groups engage in conflicts, group selection will favor the production of warriors. Then, we show that group engagement can evolve if it is associated with acculturation. Finally, we study the coevolution of engagement and acculturation. Our model shows that horizontal transmission of culture between interacting groups can act as a cultural driver and lead to the maintenance of costly behaviors by both individuals and groups.

Mating Performance: Assessing Flirting Skills, Mate Signal-Detection Ability, and Shyness Effects

Several people today experience poor mating performance, that is, they face difficulties in starting and/or keeping an intimate relationship. On the basis of an evolutionary theoretical framework, it was hypothesized that poor mating performance would be predicted by poor flirting skills, poor mate signal-detection ability, and high shyness. By employing a sample of 587 Greek-speaking men and women, we found that more than 40% of our participants experienced difficulties in starting and/or keeping an intimate relationship. We also found that poor flirting skills, poor mate signal-detection ability, and high shyness were associated with poor performance in mating, especially with respect to starting an intimate relationship. The effect sizes and the odds ratios indicated that flirting skills had the largest effect on mating performance, followed by the mate signal-detection ability and shyness.

Humans adapt to social diversity over time

Humans have evolved cognitive processes favoring homogeneity, stability, and structure. These processes are, however, incompatible with a socially diverse world, raising wide academic and political concern about the future of modern societies. With data comprising 22 y of religious diversity worldwide, we show across multiple surveys that humans are inclined to react negatively to threats to homogeneity (i.e., changes in diversity are associated with lower self-reported quality of life, explained by a decrease in trust in others) in the short term. However, these negative outcomes are compensated in the long term by the beneficial influence of intergroup contact, which alleviates initial negative influences. This research advances knowledge that can foster peaceful coexistence in a new era defined by globalization and a socially diverse future.

Life-History Evolution: Grandmothering in Space and Time

The evolutionary puzzle of the extended post-reproductive life of female humans has been explained by indirect fitness benefits gained by grandmothers helping raise their grandchildren. Two new studies support this 'grandmother hypothesis' and explore its limits in space and time.

The continuing evolution of ownership

The evolution in animals of a first possession convention, in which individuals retain what they are the first to acquire, has often been taken as a foundation for the evolution of human ownership institutions. However, among humans, individuals actually only seldom retain an item they have acquired from the environment, instead typically transferring what they possess to other members of the community, to those in command, or to those who hold a contractual title. This paper presents a novel game-theoretic model of the evolution of ownership institutions as rules governing resource transfers. Integrating existing findings, the model contributes a new perspective on the emergence of communal transfers among hominin large game hunters around 200,000 years ago, of command ownership among sedentary humans in the millennia prior to the transition to agriculture, and of titled property ownership around 5,500 years ago. Since today's property institutions motivate transfers through the promise of future returns, the analysis presented here suggests that these institutions may be placed under considerable pressure should resources become significantly constrained.

The emergence of human warfare: Current perspectives

The origins of warfare have long been of interest for researchers across disciplines. Did our earliest ancestors engage in forms of organized violence that are appropriately viewed as approximations, forms of, or analogs for more recent forms of warfare? Assessed in this article are contrasting views that see warfare as being either a product of more recent human societies or a phenomenon with a much deeper chronology. The article provides an overview of current debates, theories, and methodological approaches, citing literature and data from archaeological, ethnographic, genetic, primatological, and paleoanthropological studies. Synthetic anthropological treatments are needed, especially in efforts to inform debates among nonacademic audiences, because the discipline's approaches are ideally suited to study the origins of warfare. Emphasized is the need to consider possible forms of violence and intergroup aggression within Pleistocene contexts, despite the methodological challenges associated with fragmentary, equivocal, or scarce data. Finally, the review concludes with an argument about the implications of the currently available data. We propose that socially cooperative violence, or "emergent warfare," became possible with the onset of symbolic thought and complex cognition. Viewing emergent warfare as a byproduct of the human capacity for symbolic thought explains how the same capacities for communication and sociality allowed for elaborate peacemaking, conflict resolution, and avoidance. Cultural institutions around war and peace are both made possible by these changes. Accordingly, we suggest that studies on warfare's origins should be tied to research on the advent of cooperation, sociality, and communication.

Hunter-Gatherers and Human Evolution: New Light on Old Debates

One of the most persistent debates in anthropology and related disciplines has been over the relative weight of aggression and competition versus nonaggression and cooperation as drivers of human behavioral evolution. The literature on hunting and gathering societies—past and present—has played a prominent role in these debates. This review compares recent literature from both sides of the argument and evaluates how accurately various authors use or misuse the ethnographic and archaeological research on hunters and gatherers. Whereas some theories provide a very poor fit with the hunter-gatherer evidence, others build their arguments around a much fuller range of the available data. The latter make a convincing case for models of human evolution that place at their center cooperative breeding and child-rearing, as well as management of conflict, flexible land tenure, and balanced gender relations.

Revisiting the form and function of conflict: Neurobiological, psychological, and cultural mechanisms for attack and defense within and between groups

Conflict can profoundly affect individuals and their groups. Oftentimes, conflict involves a clash between one side seeking change and increased gains through victory and the other side defending the status quo and protecting against loss and defeat. However, theory and empirical research largely neglected these conflicts between attackers and defenders, and the strategic, social, and psychological consequences of attack and defense remain poorly understood. To fill this void, we model (1) the clashing of attack and defense as games of strategy and reveal that (2) attack benefits from mismatching its target's level of defense, whereas defense benefits from matching the attacker's competitiveness. This suggests that (3) attack recruits neuroendocrine pathways underlying behavioral activation and overconfidence, whereas defense invokes neural networks for behavioral inhibition, vigilant scanning, and hostile attributions; and that (4) people invest less in attack than defense, and attack often fails. Finally, we propose that (5) in intergroup conflict, out-group attack needs institutional arrangements that motivate and coordinate collective action, whereas in-group defense benefits from endogenously emerging in-group identification. We discuss how games of attack and defense may have shaped human capacities for prosociality and aggression, and how third parties can regulate such conflicts and reduce their waste.

Conspiracy Theories: Evolved Functions and Psychological Mechanisms

Belief in conspiracy theories—such as that the 9/11 terrorist attacks were an inside job or that the pharmaceutical industry deliberately spreads diseases—is a widespread and culturally universal phenomenon. Why do so many people around the globe believe conspiracy theories, and why are they so influential? Previous research focused on the proximate mechanisms underlying conspiracy beliefs but ignored the distal, evolutionary origins and functions. We review evidence pertaining to two competing evolutionary hypotheses: (a) conspiracy beliefs are a by-product of a suite of psychological mechanisms (e.g., pattern recognition, agency detection, threat management, alliance detection) that evolved for different reasons, or (b) conspiracy beliefs are part of an evolved psychological mechanism specifically aimed at detecting dangerous coalitions. This latter perspective assumes that conspiracy theories are activated after specific coalition cues, which produce functional counterstrategies to cope with suspected conspiracies. Insights from social, cultural and evolutionary psychology provide tentative support for six propositions that follow from the adaptation hypothesis. We propose that people possess a functionally integrated mental system to detect conspiracies that in all likelihood has been shaped in an ancestral human environment in which hostile coalitions—that is, conspiracies that truly existed—were a frequent cause of misery, death, and reproductive loss.

Why war is a man's game

Interest in the evolutionary origins and drivers of warfare in ancient and contemporary small-scale human societies has greatly increased in the last decade, and has been particularly spurred by exciting archaeological discoveries that suggest our ancestors led more violent lives than previously documented. However, the striking observation that warfare is an almost-exclusively male activity remains unexplained. Three general hypotheses have been proposed, concerning greater male effectiveness in warfare, lower male costs, and patrilocality. But while each of these factors might explain why warfare is more common in men, they do not convincingly explain why women almost never participate. Here, we develop a mathematical model to formally assess these hypotheses. Surprisingly, we find that exclusively male warfare may evolve even in the absence of any such sex differences, though sex biases in these parameters can make this evolutionary outcome more likely. The qualitative observation that participation in warfare is almost exclusive to one sex is ultimately explained by the fundamentally sex-specific nature of Darwinian competition—in fitness terms, men compete with men and women with women. These results reveal a potentially key role for ancestral conditions in shaping our species' patterns of sexual division of labour and violence-related adaptations and behavioural disorders.

May God Guide Our Guns : Visualizing Supernatural Aid Heightens Team Confidence in a Paintball Battle Simulation

The perceived support of supernatural agents has been historically, ethnographically, and theoretically linked with confidence in engaging in violent intergroup conflict. However, scant experimental investigations of such links have been reported to date, and the extant evidence derives largely from indirect laboratory methods of limited ecological validity. Here, we experimentally tested the hypothesis that perceived supernatural aid would heighten inclinations toward coalitional aggression using a realistic simulated coalitional combat paradigm: competitive team paintball. In a between-subjects design, US paintball players recruited for the study were experimentally primed with thoughts of supernatural support using a guided visualization exercise analogous to prayer, or with a control visualization of a nature scene. The participants then competed in a team paintball battle game modeled after “Capture the Flag.” Immediately before and after the battle, participants completed surveys assessing confidence in their coalitional and personal battle performance. Participants assessed their coalition’s prospects of victory and performance more positively after visualizing supernatural aid. Participants primed with supernatural support also reported inflated assessments of their own performance. Importantly, however, covarying increases in assessments of their overall coalition’s performance accounted for the latter effect. This study provided support for the hypothesis that perceived supernatural support can heighten both prospective confidence in coalitional victory and retrospective confidence in the combat performance of one’s team, while highlighting the role of competitive play in evoking the coalitional psychology of intergroup conflict. These results accord with and extend convergent prior findings derived from laboratory paradigms far removed from the experience of combat. Accordingly, the field study approach utilized here shows promise as a method for investigating coalitional battle dynamics in a realistic, experientially immersive manner.

Caller characteristics influence recruitment to collective anti-predator events in jackdaws

Across the animal kingdom, examples abound of individuals coming together to repel external threats. When such collective actions are initiated by recruitment signals, individuals may benefit from being selective in whom they join, so the identity of the initiator may determine the magnitude of the group response. However, the role of signaller discrimination in coordinating group-level responses has yet to be tested. Here we show that in wild jackdaws, a colonial corvid species, collective responses to anti-predator recruitment calls are mediated by caller characteristics. In playbacks next to nestboxes, the calls of nestbox residents attracted most recruits, followed in turn by other colony members, non-colony members and rooks (a sympatric corvid). Playbacks in fields outside nestbox colonies, where the immediate threat to broods was lower, showed similar results, with highest recruitment to nearby colony members’ calls. Responses were further influenced by caller sex: calls from non-colony member females were less likely to elicit responsive scolding by recruits than other calls, potentially reflecting social rank associated with sex and colony membership. These results show that vocal discrimination mediates jackdaws’ collective responses and highlight the need for further research into the cognitive basis of collective actions in animal groups.

Public Reactions to Male Versus Female Terrorism: Experimental Evidence for the Male Warrior Hypothesis

One of the most consistent findings in the domain of criminal justice is that female and male offenders are perceived differently, often resulting in milder sentencing of women compared to men. Although previous studies have sought to identify factors that shape public reactions to terrorism and support for harsh interrogation techniques in its aftermath, empirical studies on differential reactions to female (vs. male) terrorist violence remain scarce. Here, it is argued that the often-violent evolutionary history of our species has shaped the way in which we perceive and react to female (vs. male) terrorist violence. Based on the framework of coalitional psychology-and specifically, the male warrior hypothesis-the assumption is tested that terror-suspect sex, in interaction with other threat cues such as in- or out-group membership and size of coalition, affects support for interrogational torture. This prediction was tested by conducting a survey experiment on a nationally representative sample of 2,126 U.S. adults. Results demonstrated that terror-suspect sex significantly shapes reactions to and perceptions of terrorist violence. Further, nuanced responses based on respondent sex revealed that these associations were exclusively driven by male participants. Gender attitudes and mere punitiveness did not account for the findings, suggesting that male coalitional psychology is deeply ingrained and readily activated by cues implying intergroup conflict.

Zoon politikon: The evolutionary origins of human socio-political systems

We deploy the most up-to-date evidence available in various behavioral fields in support of the following hypothesis: The emergence of bipedalism and cooperative breeding in the hominin line, together with environmental developments that made a diet of meat from large animals adaptive, as well as cultural innovations in the form of fire, cooking, and lethal weapons, created a niche for hominins in which there was a significant advantage to individuals with the ability to communicate and persuade in a moral context. These forces added a unique political dimension to human social life which, through gene-culture coevolution, became Homo ludens-Man, the game player-with the power to conserve and transform the social order. Homo sapiens became, in the words of Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics, a zoon politikon.

Trends and fluctuations in the severity of interstate wars

Since 1945, there have been relatively few large interstate wars, especially compared to the preceding 30 years, which included both World Wars. This pattern, sometimes called the long peace, is highly controversial. Does it represent an enduring trend caused by a genuine change in the underlying conflict-generating processes? Or is it consistent with a highly variable but otherwise stable system of conflict? Using the empirical distributions of interstate war sizes and onset times from 1823 to 2003, we parameterize stationary models of conflict generation that can distinguish trends from statistical fluctuations in the statistics of war. These models indicate that both the long peace and the period of great violence that preceded it are not statistically uncommon patterns in realistic but stationary conflict time series. This fact does not detract from the importance of the long peace or the proposed mechanisms that explain it. However, the models indicate that the postwar pattern of peace would need to endure at least another 100 to 140 years to become a statistically significant trend. This fact places an implicit upper bound on the magnitude of any change in the true likelihood of a large war after the end of the Second World War. The historical patterns of war thus seem to imply that the long peace may be substantially more fragile than proponents believe, despite recent efforts to identify mechanisms that reduce the likelihood of interstate wars.

Two types of aggression in human evolution

Two major types of aggression, proactive and reactive, are associated with contrasting expression, eliciting factors, neural pathways, development, and function. The distinction is useful for understanding the nature and evolution of human aggression. Compared with many primates, humans have a high propensity for proactive aggression, a trait shared with chimpanzees but not bonobos. By contrast, humans have a low propensity for reactive aggression compared with chimpanzees, and in this respect humans are more bonobo-like. The bimodal classification of human aggression helps solve two important puzzles. First, a long-standing debate about the significance of aggression in human nature is misconceived, because both positions are partly correct. The Hobbes-Huxley position rightly recognizes the high potential for proactive violence, while the Rousseau-Kropotkin position correctly notes the low frequency of reactive aggression. Second, the occurrence of two major types of human aggression solves the execution paradox, concerned with the hypothesized effects of capital punishment on self-domestication in the Pleistocene. The puzzle is that the propensity for aggressive behavior was supposedly reduced as a result of being selected against by capital punishment, but capital punishment is itself an aggressive behavior. Since the aggression used by executioners is proactive, the execution paradox is solved to the extent that the aggressive behavior of which victims were accused was frequently reactive, as has been reported. Both types of killing are important in humans, although proactive killing appears to be typically more frequent in war. The biology of proactive aggression is less well known and merits increased attention.

Neural bases of ingroup altruistic motivation in soccer fans

Humans have a strong need to belong to social groups and a natural inclination to benefit ingroup members. Although the psychological mechanisms behind human prosociality have extensively been studied, the specific neural systems bridging group belongingness and altruistic motivation remain to be identified. Here, we used soccer fandom as an ecological framing of group membership to investigate the neural mechanisms underlying ingroup altruistic behaviour in male fans using event-related functional magnetic resonance. We designed an effort measure based on handgrip strength to assess the motivation to earn money (i) for oneself, (ii) for anonymous ingroup fans, or (iii) for a neutral group of anonymous non-fans. While overlapping valuation signals in the medial orbitofrontal cortex (mOFC) were observed for the three conditions, the subgenual cingulate cortex (SCC) exhibited increased functional connectivity with the mOFC as well as stronger hemodynamic responses for ingroup versus outgroup decisions. These findings indicate a key role for the SCC, a region previously implicated in altruistic decisions and group affiliation, in dovetailing altruistic motivations with neural valuation systems in real-life ingroup behaviour.

Parochial trust and cooperation across 17 societies

International challenges such as climate change, poverty, and intergroup conflict require countries to cooperate to solve these complex problems. However, the political tide in many countries has shifted inward, with skepticism and reluctance to cooperate with other countries. Thus, cross-societal investigations are needed to test theory about trust and cooperation within and between groups. We conducted an experimental study in 17 countries designed to test several theories that explain why, who, and where people trust and cooperate more with ingroup members, compared with outgroup members. The experiment involved several interactions in the trust game, either as a trustor or trustee. We manipulated partner group membership in the trust game (ingroup, outgroup, or unknown) and if their reputation was at stake during the interaction. In addition to the standard finding that participants trust and cooperate more with ingroup than outgroup members, we obtained findings that reputational concerns play a decisive role for promoting trust and cooperation universally across societies. Furthermore, men discriminated more in favor of their ingroup than women. Individual differences in cooperative preferences, as measured by social value orientation, predicted cooperation with both ingroup and outgroup members. Finally, we did not find support for three theories about the cross-societal conditions that influence the degree of ingroup favoritism observed across societies (e.g., material security, religiosity, and pathogen stress). We discuss the implications for promoting cooperation within and between countries.

The Evolutionary Psychology of War: Offense and Defense in the Adapted Mind

The study of warfare from an evolutionary perspective has expanded rapidly over the last couple of decades. However, it has tended to focus on the ancestral origins, prevalence, and instruments of war rather than adaptationist analyses of its underlying psychology. I argue that our evolved coalitional psychology may contain a set of distinct evolved heuristics designed specifically for offensive and defensive coalitional aggression. Data from two survey experiments are presented, in which subjects were given scenarios depicting offensive or defensive aggression and were told to make decisions, for example, regarding their willingness to participate in the conflict, their opinions of others who did not choose to participate, and their expectations benefit. The results indicate that humans do indeed distinguish readily between these two domains and that their willingness to participate, as well as their emotional responses toward others, is highly contingent upon this informational cue in adaptively relevant ways. In addition, and consistent with parental investment theory, data reveal a range of sex differences in attitudes toward coalitional aggression in the two conflict domains. Beyond the study of warfare, this project has implications for our understanding of the relationship between individual behavior and group dynamics, as well as for our understanding of the mechanisms by which the psychological framing of political events can lead to important social outcomes.

Reciprocity Outperforms Conformity to Promote Cooperation

Evolutionary psychologists have proposed two processes that could give rise to the pervasiveness of human cooperation observed among individuals who are not genetically related: reciprocity and conformity. We tested whether reciprocity outperformed conformity in promoting cooperation, especially when these psychological processes would promote a different cooperative or noncooperative response. To do so, across three studies, we observed participants’ cooperation with a partner after learning (a) that their partner had behaved cooperatively (or not) on several previous trials and (b) that their group members had behaved cooperatively (or not) on several previous trials with that same partner. Although we found that people both reciprocate and conform, reciprocity has a stronger influence on cooperation. Moreover, we found that conformity can be partly explained by a concern about one’s reputation—a finding that supports a reciprocity framework.

Human niche, human behaviour, human nature

The concept of a 'human nature' or 'human natures' retains a central role in theorizing about the human experience. In Homo sapiens it is clear that we have a suite of capacities generated via our evolutionary past, and present, and a flexible capacity to create and sustain particular kinds of cultures and to be shaped by them. Regardless of whether we label these capacities 'human natures' or not, humans occupy a distinctive niche and an evolutionary approach to examining it is critical. At present we are faced with a few different narratives as to exactly what such an evolutionary approach entails. There is a need for a robust and dynamic theoretical toolkit in order to develop a richer, and more nuanced, understanding of the cognitively sophisticated genus Homo and the diverse sorts of niches humans constructed and occupied across the Pleistocene, Holocene, and into the Anthropocene. Here I review current evolutionary approaches to 'human nature', arguing that we benefit from re-framing our investigations via the concept of the human niche and in the context of the extended evolutionary synthesis (EES). While not a replacement of standard evolutionary approaches, this is an expansion and enhancement of our toolkit. I offer brief examples from human evolution in support of these assertions.

Oxytocin promotes intuitive rather than deliberated cooperation with the in-group

A contribution to a special issue on Hormones and Human Competition. In intergroup settings, individuals prefer cooperating with their in-group, and sometimes derogate and punish out-groups. Here we replicate earlier work showing that such in-group bounded cooperation is conditioned by oxytocin and extend it by showing that oxytocin-motivated in-group cooperation is intuitive rather than deliberated. Healthy males (N=65) and females (N=129) self-administered intranasal placebo or 24IU oxytocin in a double-blind placebo-controlled between-subjects design, were assigned to a three-person in-group (that faced a 3-person out-group), and given an endowment from which they could contribute to a within-group pool (benefitting the in-group), and/or to a between-group pool (benefitting the in-group and punishing the out-group). Prior to decision-making, participants performed a Stroop Interference task that was either cognitively taxing, or not. Cognitively taxed individuals kept less to themselves and contributed more to the within-group pool. Furthermore, participants receiving placebo contributed more to the within-group pool when they were cognitively taxed rather than not; those receiving oxytocin contributed to the within-group pool regardless of cognitive taxation. Neither taxation nor treatment influenced contributions to the between-group pool, and no significant sex differences were observed. It follows that in intergroup settings (i) oxytocin increases in-group bounded cooperation, (ii) oxytocin neither reduces nor increases out-group directed spite, and (iii) oxytocin-induced in-group cooperation is independent of cognitive taxation and, therefore, likely to be intuitive rather than consciously deliberated.

Neural substrates of male parochial altruism are modulated by testosterone and behavioral strategy

Parochial altruism refers to ingroup favoritism and outgroup hostility and has recently been linked to testosterone. Here, we investigated the neurobiological mechanism of parochial altruism in male soccer fans playing the ultimatum game (UG) against ingroup and outgroup members (i.e., fans of the favorite or of a rivalling team) using functional magnetic resonance imaging. Our results suggest that individual differences in altruistic tendency influence the tendency for parochialism. While altruistic subjects rejected unfair offers independent of team membership, the more self-oriented 'pro-selfs' displayed a stronger ingroup bias and rejected outgroup offers more often. However, during a second session that introduced a team competition the altruists adapted to this parochial pattern. Behavioral strategy was further characterized by dissociable and context-dependent correlations between endogenous testosterone and neural responses in the anterior insula and the ventromedial prefrontal cortex. In sum, the present findings indicate that parochial altruism is shaped by individual differences in testosterone and behavioral strategy. In that way the results are in line with evolutionary theories of both individual and group selection.

Large-scale effects of migration and conflict in pre-agricultural groups: Insights from a dynamic model

The debate on the causes of conflict in human societies has deep roots. In particular, the extent of conflict in hunter-gatherer groups remains unclear. Some authors suggest that large-scale violence only arose with the spreading of agriculture and the building of complex societies. To shed light on this issue, we developed a model based on operatorial techniques simulating population-resource dynamics within a two-dimensional lattice, with humans and natural resources interacting in each cell of the lattice. The model outcomes under different conditions were compared with recently available demographic data for prehistoric South America. Only under conditions that include migration among cells and conflict was the model able to consistently reproduce the empirical data at a continental scale. We argue that the interplay between resource competition, migration, and conflict drove the population dynamics of South America after the colonization phase and before the introduction of agriculture. The relation between population and resources indeed emerged as a key factor leading to migration and conflict once the carrying capacity of the environment has been reached.

Inter-group cooperation in humans and other animals

Social interactions are often characterized by cooperation within groups and conflict or competition between groups. In certain circumstances, however, cooperation can arise between social groups. Here, we examine the circumstances under which inter-group cooperation is expected to emerge and present examples with particular focus on groups in two well-studied but dissimilar taxa: humans and ants. Drivers for the evolution of inter-group cooperation include overarching threats from predators, competitors or adverse conditions, and group-level resource asymmetries. Resources can differ between groups in both quantity and type. Where the difference is in type, inequalities can lead to specialization and division of labour between groups, a phenomenon characteristic of human societies, but rarely seen in other animals. The ability to identify members of one's own group is essential for social coherence; we consider the proximate roles of identity effects in shaping inter-group cooperation and allowing membership of multiple groups. Finally, we identify numerous valuable avenues for future research that will improve our understanding of the processes shaping inter-group cooperation.

Family counts: deciding when to murder among the Icelandic Vikings

In small scale societies, lethal attacks on another individual usually invite revenge by the victim's family. We might expect those who perpetrate such attacks to do so only when their own support network (mainly family) is larger than that of the potential victim so as to minimise the risk of retaliation. Using data from Icelandic family sagas, we show that this prediction holds whether we consider biological kin or affinal kin (in-laws): on average, killers had twice as many relatives as their victims. These findings reinforce the importance of kin as a source of implicit protection even when they are not physically present. The results also support Hughes' (1988) claim that affines are biological kin because of the shared genetic interests they have in the offspring generation.

Between-group competition elicits within-group cooperation in children

Aggressive interactions between groups are frequent in human societies and can bear significant fitness costs and benefits (e.g. death or access to resources). During between-group competitive interactions, more cohesive groups (i.e. groups formed by individuals who cooperate in group defence) should out-perform less cohesive groups, other factors being equal (e.g. group size). The cost/benefit of between-group competition are thought to have driven correlated evolution of traits that favour between-group aggression and within-group cooperation (e.g. parochial altruism). Our aim was to analyse whether the proximate relationship between between-group competition and within-group cooperation is found in 3-10 years old children and the developmental trajectory of such a relationship. We used a large cohort of children (n = 120) and tested whether simulated between-group competition increased within-group cooperation (i.e. how much of a resource children were giving to their group companions) in two experiments. We found greater within-group cooperation when groups of four children were competing with other groups then in the control condition (no between-group competition). Within-group cooperation increased with age. Our study suggests that parochial altruism and in-group/out-group biases emerge early during the course of human development.

Intrafamily and intragenomic conflicts in human warfare

Recent years have seen an explosion of multidisciplinary interest in ancient human warfare. Theory has emphasized a key role for kin-selected cooperation, modulated by sex-specific demography, in explaining intergroup violence. However, conflicts of interest remain a relatively underexplored factor in the evolutionary-ecological study of warfare, with little consideration given to which parties influence the decision to go to war and how their motivations may differ. We develop a mathematical model to investigate the interplay between sex-specific demography and human warfare, showing that: the ecology of warfare drives the evolution of sex-biased dispersal; sex-biased dispersal modulates intrafamily and intragenomic conflicts in relation to warfare; intragenomic conflict drives parent-of-origin-specific patterns of gene expression-i.e. 'genomic imprinting'-in relation to warfare phenotypes; and an ecological perspective of conflicts at the levels of the gene, individual, and social group yields novel predictions as to pathologies associated with mutations and epimutations at loci underpinning human violence.

Out-Group Threat Responses, In-Group Bias, and Nonapeptide Involvement Are Conserved across Vertebrates: (A Comment on Bruintjes et al., "Out-Group Threat Promotes Within-Group Affiliation in a Cooperative Fish")

The challenges and threats posed by out-groups have major effects on human social behavior and how individuals interact with one another. We briefly review evidence here that out-group threat similarly affects nonhuman animal behavior. Actual and potential threats posed by out-group individuals (unfamiliar and genetically nonrelated individuals of the same species) affect social behavior promoting "out-group" avoidance and "in-group" bias and enhancing in-group (familiar and/or genetically related individuals) affiliation and interactions. Individuals from out-groups present risks of pathogen exposure as well as being threats to resources, territory, and offspring. All of these threats function to promote in-group bias in humans and nonhumans. There are also striking similarities in the underlying neurobiological mechanisms mediating the responses to out-group threat and the expression of in-group bias. In particular, the evolutionarily conserved, hormone-regulated nonapeptide systems (oxytocin, arginine-vasopressin, and homologous neuropeptides and their receptors) are involved in the mediation of the detection and avoidance of out-groups and response to in-groups and facilitation of in-group responses across multiple vertebrate species. Consequently, comparative investigations of both the behavioral expression of and the mechanism underlying out-group avoidance and in-group bias are necessary for a full understanding of the evolution of social behavior and responses to in- and out-groups.

Expanding the Link between Out-Group Threats and In-Group Behavior: (A Reply to Kavaliers and Choleris)

In social species, groups and their members face a variety of threats from conspecific outsiders. Such out-group conflict is predicted to influence within-group behavior, with empirical work demonstrating this link in humans, primates, and birds. In our note "Out-Group Threat Promotes Within-Group Affiliation in a Cooperative Fish," appearing in The American Naturalist in February 2016, we provided experimental evidence that simulated territorial intrusions result in subsequent increases in affiliation among groupmates in a cichlid fish (Neolamprologus pulcher). Martin Kavaliers and Elena Choleris, in their comment "Out-Group Threat Responses, In-Group Bias, and Nonapeptide Involvement Are Conserved Across Vertebrates," appearing in this issue, commented on our cichlid-fish article; they consider the conserved nature of the link between out-group threat and in-group behavior and bias in vertebrates, the influence of pathogens in the process, and the potential underpinning hormonal mechanisms. Here, we provide clarification and expansion of some of the core points that are discussed in the comment by Kavaliers and Choleris.

Intergroup Biases in Fear-induced Aggression

Using a recently created preemptive strike game (PSG) with 176 participants, we investigated if the motivations of spite and/or fear promotes aggression that requires a small cost to the aggressor and imposes a larger cost on the opponent, and confirmed the earlier finding that fear does but spite does not promote intergroup aggression when the groups are characterized as minimal groups; additionally, the rate of intergroup aggression did not vary according to the group membership of the opponent. The PSG represents a situation in which both the motivations of spite and of fear can logically drive players to choose an option of aggression against an opponent. Participants decide whether or not to attack another participant, who also has the same capability. The decision is made in real time, using a computer. We discuss theoretical implications of our findings on the evolutionary foundations of intragroup cooperation and intergroup aggression. The evolutionary model of intergroup aggression, or the parochial altruism model, posits that intragroup cooperation and intergroup aggression have co-evolved, and thus it predicts both intragroup cooperation and intergroup aggression to emerge even in a minimal group devoid of a history of intergroup relationships. The finding that only intragroup cooperation but not intergroup aggression emerged in the minimal group experiments strongly suggests that intergroup aggression involves a psychological mechanism that is independent from that of intragroup cooperation. We further discuss the implications of these findings on real-world politics and military strategy.

Oxytocin reactivity during intergroup conflict in wild chimpanzees

Intergroup conflict is evident throughout the history of our species, ubiquitous across human societies, and considered crucial for the evolution of humans' large-scale cooperative nature. Like humans, chimpanzee societies exhibit intragroup coordination and coalitionary support during violent intergroup conflicts. In both species, cooperation among group members is essential for individuals to gain access to benefits from engaging in intergroup conflict. Studies suggest that a contributive mechanism regulating in-group cooperation during intergroup conflicts in humans involves the neuropeptide hormone oxytocin, known to influence trust, coordination, and social cognition, although evidence from natural settings is lacking. Here, applying a noninvasive method, we investigate oxytocinergic system involvement during natural intergroup conflicts in wild chimpanzees. We found that chimpanzees of both sexes had significantly higher urinary oxytocin levels immediately before and during intergroup conflict compared with controls. Also, elevated hormone levels were linked with greater cohesion during intergroup conflicts, rather than with the level of potential threat posed by rival groups, intragroup affiliative social interactions, or coordinated behavior alone. Thus, the oxytocinergic system, potentially engendering cohesion and cooperation when facing an out-group threat, may not be uniquely human but rather a mechanism with evolutionary roots shared by our last common ancestor with chimpanzees, likely expediting fitness gains during intergroup conflict.

Language as a coordination tool evolves slowly

Social living ultimately depends on coordination between group members, and communication is necessary to make this possible. We suggest that this might have been the key selection pressure acting on the evolution of language in humans and use a behavioural coordination model to explore the impact of communication efficiency on social group coordination. We show that when language production is expensive but there is an individual benefit to the efficiency with which individuals coordinate their behaviour, the evolution of efficient communication is selected for. Contrary to some views of language evolution, the speed of evolution is necessarily slow because there is no advantage in some individuals evolving communication abilities that much exceed those of the community at large. However, once a threshold competence has been achieved, evolution of higher order language skills may indeed be precipitate.