The evolution of extraordinary self-sacrifice.

From a theoretical perspective, individuals are expected to sacrifice their welfare only when the benefits outweigh the costs. In nature, however, the costs of altruism and spite can be extreme, as in cases of irreversible sterility and self-destructive weaponry. Here we show that "extraordinary" self-sacrifice-in which actors pay costs that exceed the benefits they give or the costs they impose on recipients-can evolve in structured populations, where social actions bring secondary benefits to neighboring kin. When given information about dispersal, sedentary actors evolve extraordinary altruism towards dispersing kin. Likewise, when given information about dispersal and kinship, sedentary actors evolve extraordinary spite towards sedentary nonkin. Our results can thus be summed up by a simple rule: extraordinary self-sacrifice evolves when the actor's neighbors are close kin and the recipient's neighbors are not.

Is Psychopathy a Mental Disorder or an Adaptation? Evidence From a Meta-Analysis of the Association Between Psychopathy and Handedness.

Psychopathy has historically been conceptualized as a mental disorder, but there is growing evidence that it may instead be an alternative, adaptive life history strategy designed by natural selection. Although the etiology of mental disorders is not fully understood, one likely contributor is perturbations affecting neurodevelopment. Nonright-handedness is a sign of such perturbations, and therefore can be used to test these competing models. If psychopathy is a mental disorder, psychopaths should show elevated rates of nonright-handedness. However, an adaptive strategy perspective expects psychopaths to be neurologically healthy and therefore predicts typical rates of nonright-handedness. We meta-analyzed 16 studies that investigated the association between psychopathy and handedness in various populations. There was no difference in the rates of nonright-handedness between community participants high and low in psychopathy. Furthermore, there was no difference between psychopathic and nonpsychopathic offenders in rates of nonright-handedness, though there was a tendency for offenders scoring higher on the Interpersonal/Affective dimension of psychopathy to have lower rates of nonright-handedness, and for offenders scoring higher on the Behavioral dimension of psychopathy to have higher rates of nonright-handedness. Lastly, there was no difference in rates of nonright-handedness between psychopathic and nonpsychopathic mental health patients. Thus, our results fail to support the mental disorder model and partly support the adaptive strategy model. We discuss limitations of the meta-analysis and implications for theories of the origins of psychopathy.

Local Competition Amplifies the Corrosive Effects of Inequality.

Inequality is widely believed to incite conflict, but the evidence is inconsistent. We argue that the spatial scale of competition-the extent to which individuals compete locally, with their interaction partners, or globally, with the entire population-can help settle the question. We built a mathematical model of the evolution of conflict under inequality and tested its predictions in an experimental game with 1,205 participants. We found that inequality increases conflict, destroys wealth, and engenders risk taking. Crucially, these effects are amplified by local competition. Thus, inequality is at its most damaging when it arises between close competitors. Indeed, at the extremes, the combined effects of inequality and the scale of competition are very large. More broadly, our findings suggest that disagreements in the literature may be the result of a mismatch between the scale at which inequality is measured and the scale at which conflict occurs.

The importance of being explicit.

Van Lange et al. propose that climate affects violence via its effects on life history. That much is reasonable (and not novel), but their theory lacks causal specificity. Their foundational claim of an association between heat and violence is not well documented, and several findings that the authors themselves cite seem inconsistent with their model, rather than supportive.

Self-Resemblance and Social Rejection.

Humans perceive and treat self-resembling others in ways that suggest that self-resemblance is a cue of kinship. However, we know little about how individuals respond to treatment by self-resembling others. Here we approach this problem by connecting facial self-resemblance to social rejection. Given that individuals should expect to cooperate with kin, we hypothesized that (1) social inclusion by perceived kin should elicit lesser feelings of rejection and (2) social exclusion by perceived kin should elicit greater feelings of rejection relative to inclusion or exclusion, respectively, by nonkin. To test these hypotheses, we recruited 90 participants to play two games of Cyberball, a virtual ball-tossing game, with separate pairs of ostensible partners. In one game, the ostensible partners were programed to fully include the participants in group play and, in the other game, they were programed to exclude the participants after a few rounds; the order of inclusion and exclusion was counterbalanced across participants. Partner faces were digitally manipulated to be either self- or nonself-resembling, and these conditions were also counterbalanced. Rejection feelings differed significantly as a function of self-resemblance between the inclusion and exclusion conditions, but only for participants who experienced inclusion first. Moreover, for these individuals, inclusion by self-resembling partners led to significantly lesser feelings of rejection than did inclusion by nonself-resembling partners. To explain this effect, we explore potential mechanisms of kin recognition and social rejection. Although nuanced, our results suggest that perceptions of kinship can moderate psychological responses to the actions of others.

Causality and the Levels of Selection.

When is it sensible to say that group selection has shaped organismal design? This question has prompted many replies but few credible solutions. New work that exposes the causal relationships between phenotypes and fitness may finally settle the matter - and a few other things besides.

Social evolution in the shadow of asymmetrical relatedness.

The persistence of altruism and spite remains an enduring problem of social evolution. It is well known that selection for these actions depends on the structure of the population-that is, on actors' genetic relationships to recipients and to the 'neighbourhood' upon which the effects of their actions redound. Less appreciated, however, is that population structure can cause genetic asymmetries between partners whereby the relatedness (defined relative to the neighbourhood) of an individual i to a partner j will differ from the relatedness of j to i. Here, we introduce a widespread mechanism of kin recognition to a model of dispersal in subdivided populations. In so doing, we uncover three remarkable consequences of asymmetrical relatedness. First, altruism directed at phenotypically similar partners evolves more easily among migrant than native actors. Second, spite directed at dissimilar partners evolves more easily among native than migrant actors. Third, unlike migrants, natives can evolve to pay costs that far outstrip those they spitefully impose on others. We find that the frequency of natives relative to migrants amplifies the asymmetries between them. Taken together, our results reveal differentiated patterns of 'phenocentrism' that readily arise from asymmetries of relatedness.

How to distinguish altruism from spite (and why we should bother).

Social behaviour is often described as altruistic, spiteful, selfish or mutually beneficial. These terms are appealing, but it has not always been clear how they are defined and what purpose they serve. Here, I show that the distinctions among them arise from the ways in which fitness is partitioned: none can be drawn when the fitness consequences of an action are wholly aggregated, but they manifest clearly when the consequences are partitioned into primary and secondary (neighbourhood) effects. I argue that the primary interaction is the principal source of adaptive design, because (i) it is this interaction that determines the fit of an adaptation and (ii) it is the actor and primary recipients whom an adaptation foremost affects. The categories of social action are thus instrumental to any account of evolved function.

Kin recognition: evidence that humans can perceive both positive and negative relatedness.

The evolution of spite entails actors imposing costs on 'negative' relatives: those who are less likely than chance to share the actor's alleles and therefore more likely to bear rival alleles. Yet, despite a considerable body of research confirming that organisms can recognize positive relatives, little research has shown that organisms can recognize negative relatives. Here, we extend previous work on human phenotype matching by introducing a cue to negative relatedness: negative self-resembling faces, which differ from an average face in the opposite direction to the way an individual's own face differs from the average. Participants made trustworthiness and attractiveness judgements of pairs of opposite-sex positive and negative self-resembling faces. Analyses revealed opposing effects of positive and negative self-resembling faces on trustworthiness and attractiveness judgements. This is the first clear evidence that humans are sensitive to negative relatedness cues, and suggests the potential for the adaptive allocation of spiteful behaviour.