Daven Henze discusses how air pollution spreads across the globe and what policymakers are doing in response.
New Research In
Physical Sciences
Featured Portals
Articles by Topic
Biological Sciences
Featured Portals
Articles by Topic
Edited by Susan T. Fiske, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, and approved June 14, 2016 (received for review January 23, 2016)
Significance
Human prosociality presents an evolutionary puzzle, and reciprocity has emerged as a dominant explanation: cooperating today can bring benefits tomorrow. Reciprocity theories clearly predict that people should only cooperate when the benefits outweigh the costs, and thus that the decision to cooperate should always depend on a cost–benefit analysis. Yet human cooperation can be very uncalculating: good friends grant favors without asking questions, romantic love “blinds” us to the costs of devotion, and ethical principles make universal moral prescriptions. Here, we provide the first evidence, to our knowledge, that reputation effects drive uncalculating cooperation. We demonstrate, using economic game experiments, that people engage in uncalculating cooperation to signal that they can be relied upon to cooperate in the future.
Abstract
Humans frequently cooperate without carefully weighing the costs and benefits. As a result, people may wind up cooperating when it is not worthwhile to do so. Why risk making costly mistakes? Here, we present experimental evidence that reputation concerns provide an answer: people cooperate in an uncalculating way to signal their trustworthiness to observers. We present two economic game experiments in which uncalculating versus calculating decision-making is operationalized by either a subject’s choice of whether to reveal the precise costs of cooperating (Exp. 1) or the time a subject spends considering these costs (Exp. 2). In both experiments, we find that participants are more likely to engage in uncalculating cooperation when their decision-making process is observable to others. Furthermore, we confirm that people who engage in uncalculating cooperation are perceived as, and actually are, more trustworthy than people who cooperate in a calculating way. Taken together, these data provide the first empirical evidence, to our knowledge, that uncalculating cooperation is used to signal trustworthiness, and is not merely an efficient decision-making strategy that reduces cognitive costs. Our results thus help to explain a range of puzzling behaviors, such as extreme altruism, the use of ethical principles, and romantic love.
Footnotes
- ↵1To whom correspondence may be addressed. Email: jillian.jordan{at}yale.edu or david.rand{at}yale.edu.
Author contributions: J.J.J., M.H., M.A.N., and D.G.R. designed research; J.J.J. performed research; J.J.J. and D.G.R. analyzed data; and J.J.J., M.H., M.A.N., and D.G.R. wrote the paper.
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
This article is a PNAS Direct Submission.
This article contains supporting information online at www.pnas.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10.1073/pnas.1601280113/-/DCSupplemental.
Freely available online through the PNAS open access option.
Uncalculating cooperation signals trustworthiness
Sign up for Article Alerts
Jump to section
You May Also be Interested in
Some researchers are aiming to apply the technique to a range of hard-to-treat maladies, including severe obsessive compulsive disorder, Tourette syndrome, and Alzheimer’s disease.
Image credit: Helen Mayberg.
Can a computer actually produce something new rather than merely emulating human artists? If nothing else, they are making some types of art more accessible for would-be artists.
Image credit: Roman Verostko (artist).
PNAS Profile of NAS member and geologist Paul E. Olsen.
Image courtesy of Kevin Krajick (Columbia University, New York).
Fossil evidence helps address a longstanding debate on the evolution of hagfish, a jawless, marine-dwelling slime “eel,” and suggests that living jawless vertebrates may not be as primitive as their anatomy suggests.
Image courtesy of Tetsuto Miyashita.