Evidence of partner choice heuristics in a one-shot bargaining game

被引:48
作者
Eisenbruch, Adar B. [1 ]
Grillot, Rachel L. [1 ]
Maestripieri, Dario [2 ]
Roney, James R. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Calif Santa Barbara, Dept Psychol & Brain Sci, Santa Barbara, CA 93106 USA
[2] Univ Chicago, Dept Comparat Human Dev, 940 E 57th St, Chicago, IL 60637 USA
基金
美国国家科学基金会;
关键词
Ultimatum game; Bargaining; Partner choice; Cooperation; Faces; Strength; MALE FACIAL WIDTH; ULTIMATUM-GAME; BIOLOGICAL MARKETS; FLUCTUATING ASYMMETRY; AGGRESSIVE-BEHAVIOR; SOCIAL-STATUS; COOPERATION; EVOLUTION; MEN; ATTRACTIVENESS;
D O I
10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2016.04.002
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
Economists and psychologists have developed a variety of models to explain human behavior in the ultimatum game, but none can adequately account for all of the available data. Across two studies using a face perception paradigm, we provide evidence that people use evolved, specialized heuristics for long-term cooperative partner choice to calibrate their generosity toward ultimatum game partners. Men and women played one-shot ultimatum games for real incentives with partners represented by face photographs. Men were more generous toward partners who were stronger, and who appeared more attractive, more prosocial, more productive, healthier and higher in social status; the effect of strength was mediated by productivity, but not dangerousness, suggesting that men implemented heuristics designed for partner choice rather than the asymmetric war of attrition. Moreover, men reduced their earnings by cooperating selectively with valuable long-term partners. Women also gave better treatment to valuable-appearing partners, but appeared to prioritize partner choice less than men did, relative to game earnings and intrasexual competition. The results suggest that people treat the ultimatum game as though it were an opportunity to establish a cooperative relationship with a new partner, and implications are discussed for an evolved psychology of cooperative partner choice. (C) 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:429 / 439
页数:11
相关论文
共 63 条
[1]   Know when to walk away: contingent movement and the evolution of cooperation [J].
Aktipis, CA .
JOURNAL OF THEORETICAL BIOLOGY, 2004, 231 (02) :249-260
[2]   Increased facial width-to-height ratio and perceived dominance in the faces of the UK's leading business leaders [J].
Alrajih, Shuaa ;
Ward, Jamie .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY, 2014, 105 (02) :153-161
[3]   Upper-body strength predicts hunting reputation and reproductive success in Hadza hunter-gatherers [J].
Apicella, Coren Lee .
EVOLUTION AND HUMAN BEHAVIOR, 2014, 35 (06) :508-518
[4]  
Bakan D., 1966, The duality of human existence: Isolation and communion in Western man
[5]   Sex Differences in Cooperation: A Meta-Analytic Review of Social Dilemmas [J].
Balliet, Daniel ;
Li, Norman P. ;
Macfarlan, Shane J. ;
Van Vugt, Mark .
PSYCHOLOGICAL BULLETIN, 2011, 137 (06) :881-909
[6]   Partner choice versus punishment in human Prisoner's Dilemmas [J].
Barclay, Pat ;
Raihani, Nichola .
EVOLUTION AND HUMAN BEHAVIOR, 2016, 37 (04) :263-271
[7]   Strategies for cooperation in biological markets, especially for humans [J].
Barclay, Pat .
EVOLUTION AND HUMAN BEHAVIOR, 2013, 34 (03) :164-175
[8]   The varying relationship between helping and individual quality [J].
Barclay, Pat ;
Reeve, H. Kern .
BEHAVIORAL ECOLOGY, 2012, 23 (04) :693-698
[9]   A mutualistic approach to morality: The evolution of fairness by partner choice [J].
Baumard, Nicolas ;
Andre, Jean-Baptiste ;
Sperber, Dan .
BEHAVIORAL AND BRAIN SCIENCES, 2013, 36 (01) :59-78
[10]  
Benenson J.F., 2013, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, V368, P1, DOI DOI 10.1098/rstb.2013.0079