Why Class Formation Occurs in Humans but Not among Other Primates : A Primate Coalitions Model

Models of animal coalitions and their implications for human evolution

Social interaction is a prime driver for the evolution of animal behaviour. Dyadic interaction, in particular, has been the focus of intensive research on the evolution of mutualistic, altruistic, selfish or spiteful behaviours. Meanwhile, triadic interaction has been the minimal framework for the study of animal coalition as observed in some species of primates, as well as in carnivores and cetaceans, where two or more individuals act jointly against a third party in a competitive context. Previous mathematical models of animal coalition have either failed to explain the observed diversity in the configuration of coalition or presumed fine-tuned decision-making that may be unrealistic for non-human animals. To approach these issues, the present study develops a new model that is fairly simple, but still able to account for the observed diversity in animal coalitions. Analysis of the model specifies key parameters affecting the predicted types of coalition: the nature of the benefit being contested, the cost-to-benefit ratio associated with fighting and the synergistic effect in coalition formation. Additionally, the model is used to evaluate the social selection hypothesis, which claims that coalition formation induced social selection favouring reduced aggression and lower fighting abilities during human evolution.

Whither dominance? An enduring evolutionary legacy of primate sociality

This article discusses dominance personality dimensions found in primates, particularly in the great apes, and how they compare to dominance in humans. Dominance traits are seen in virtually all primate species, and these dimensions reflect how adept an individual is at ascending within a social hierarchy. Among great apes, dominance is one of the most prominent personality factors but, in humans, dominance is usually modeled as a facet of extraversion. Social, cultural, and cognitive differences between humans and our closest ape relatives are explored, alongside humanity's hierarchical and egalitarian heritage. The basic characteristics of dominance in humans and nonhuman great apes are then described, alongside the similarities and differences between great apes. African apes live in societies each with its own hierarchical organization. Humans were a possible exception for some of our history, but more recently, hierarchies have dominated. The general characteristics of high-dominance humans, particularly those living in industrialized nations, are described. Dominance itself can be subdivided into correlated subfactors: domineering, prestige, and leadership. Various explanations have been posed for why dominance has declined in prominence within human personality factor structures, and several possibilities are evaluated. The value of dominance in personality research is discussed: dominance has links to, for instance, age, sex, aggression, self-esteem, locus of control, stress, health, and multiple socioeconomic status indicators. The piece concludes with recommendations for researchers who wish to assess dominance in personality.

Modelling the role of environmental circumscription in the evolution of inequality

Circumscription theory proposes that complex hierarchical societies emerged in areas surrounded by barriers to dispersal, e.g. mountains or seas. This theory has been widely influential but the lack of formal modelling has resulted in theoretical and empirical challenges. This theory shares parallels with reproductive skew models from evolutionary ecology where inequality depends on the capacity of subordinates to escape from despotic leaders. Building on these similarities, we extend reproductive skew models to simulate the concurrent evolution of inequality in many connected groups. Our results show that cost of migration does not directly limit inequality in the long term, but it does control the rate of increase in inequality. Second, we show that levels of inequality can be reduced if there are random errors made by dominants, as these lead to variations that propagate between polities. Third, our model clarifies the concept of circumscription by relating it to geographical features: the size of a region and the connectivity between polities. Overall, our model helps clarify some issues about how migration may affect inequality. We discuss our results in the light of anthropological and archaeological evidence and present the future extensions required to build towards a complete model of circumscription theory. This article is part of the theme issue 'Evolutionary ecology of inequality'.

Validating the dual evolutionary foundations of political values in a US sample

Psychological research repeatedly identifies two dimensions of political values. Recent work argues that these dimensions reflect the dual evolutionary foundations of human social and political life: a trade-off between cooperation and competition that generates differences in values about social inequality, and a trade-off in managing group coordination that generates differences in values about social control. Existing scales used to measure political values, however, were created prior to this framework. Here, we introduce the Dual Foundations Scale, designed to capture values about the two trade-offs. We validate the scale across two studies, showing it accurately and reliably measures both dimensions. Our results support key predictions of the dual foundations framework and pave the way for future work on the foundations of political ideology.

An Evolutionary Explanation for the Female Leadership Paradox

Social influence is distributed unequally between males and females in many mammalian societies. In human societies, gender inequality is particularly evident in access to leadership positions. Understanding why women historically and cross-culturally have tended to be under-represented as leaders within human groups and organizations represents a paradox because we lack evidence that women leaders consistently perform worse than men. We also know that women exercise overt influence in collective group-decisions within small-scale human societies, and that female leadership is pervasive in particular contexts across non-human mammalian societies. Here, we offer a transdisciplinary perspective on this female leadership paradox. Synthesis of social science and biological literatures suggests that females and males, on average, differ in why and how they compete for access to political leadership in mixed-gender groups. These differences are influenced by sexual selection and are moderated by socioecological variation across development and, particularly in human societies, by culturally transmitted norms and institutions. The interplay of these forces contributes to the emergence of female leaders within and across species. Furthermore, females may regularly exercise influence on group decisions in less conspicuous ways and different domains than males, and these underappreciated forms of leadership require more study. We offer a comprehensive framework for studying inequality between females and males in access to leadership positions, and we discuss the implications of this approach for understanding the female leadership paradox and for redressing gender inequality in leadership in humans.

Gains to cooperation drive the evolution of egalitarianism

What conditions favour egalitarianism, that is, muted hierarchies with relatively equal distributions of resources? Here, we combine the hawk-dove and prisoner's dilemma games to model the effects of economic defensibility, costs of competition and gains from cooperation on egalitarianism, operationalized as the absence of hawks. We show that a 'leveller' strategy, which punishes hawkishness in the hawk-dove game with defection in the prisoner's dilemma, can be evolutionarily stable provided that the gains from cooperation are high relative to the benefits of hawkishness. Under these conditions, rare mutant levellers select for hawks that acquiesce to punishment by playing dove. If these 'acquiescent hawks' become common, levellers outperform hawks and establish a new egalitarian equilibrium. An analysis of human foraging groups corroborates these results, as groups with a greater reliance on cooperation are more egalitarian. Cooperation fosters greater equality when individuals can withhold its benefits from would-be dominant individuals.

Coalitions and conflict: A longitudinal analysis of men's politics

To negotiate conflict and navigate status hierarchy, individuals in many species form coalitions. We describe inter-personal conflicts and assess theories of coalition formation in a small-scale human society. Based on longitudinal and cross-sectional social network analysis of men in two communities of Tsimane forager-horticulturalists, we find evidence of reciprocity in coalitional support, as well as evidence of transitivity: an ally of my ally is likely to become my ally. We find mixed support for coalition formation between individuals who share a common adversary. Coalition formation was also predicted by food- and labour-sharing and especially by kinship. Physically formidable men and men higher in informal status were more likely to provide coalitional support over time; evidence was mixed that they receive more coalitional support. The highest status men are hubs of a dense coalitional support network that indirectly link all men in the community. These findings suggest that male coalition formation is multiply motivated, and in general reveals the political dynamics that structure men's lives in small, relatively egalitarian communities.

The Marginal Utility of Inequality : A Global Examination across Ethnographic Societies

Despite decades of research, we still lack a clear explanation for the emergence and persistence of inequality. Here we propose and evaluate a marginal utility of inequality hypothesis that nominates circumscription and environmental heterogeneity as independent, necessary conditions for the emergence of intragroup material inequality. After coupling the Standard Cross-Cultural Sample (SCCS) with newly generated data from remote sensing, we test predictions derived from this hypothesis using a multivariate generalized additive model that accounts for spatial and historical dependence as well as subsistence mode. Our analyses show that the probability a society will be stratified increases significantly as a function of proxies of environmental heterogeneity and environmental circumscription. This supports the hypothesis that increasing environmental heterogeneity and circumscription drives the emergence and persistence of inequality among documented societies across the globe. We demonstrate how environmental heterogeneity and circumscription produce situations that limit individuals' options so that some may find it in their best interest to give up some autonomy for material gain, while others may find it in their best interest to give up some material resources for another individual's time or deference. These results support the marginal utility of inequality framework and enable future explorations of the ecological conditions that facilitate the emergence of intragroup inequality through time and across the globe.