Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-wq2xx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T00:55:37.669Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

What is a group? Conceptual clarity can help integrate evolutionary and social scientific research on cooperation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 June 2014

Drew Gerkey  and
Lee Cronk
Drew Gerkey
Affiliation:
Postdoctoral Fellow, National Socio-Environmental Synthesis Center, University of Maryland, Annapolis, MD 21401. drew.gerkey@gmail.comwww.sesync.org
Lee Cronk
Affiliation:
Department of Anthropology and Center for Human Evolutionary Studies, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ 08901. lcronk@anthropology.rutgers.eduhttp://anthro.rutgers.edu/fac/department-undergrad-a-grad-faculty/lee-cronk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Smaldino argues that evolutionary theories of social behavior do not adequately explain the emergence of group-level traits, including differentiation of roles and organized interactions among individuals. We find Smaldino's account to be commendable but incomplete. Our commentary focuses on a simple question that has not been adequately addressed: What is a group?

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 37 , Issue 3 , June 2014 , pp. 260 - 261
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anderson, B. R. O'G. (1991) Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism (Revised and extended ed.). Verso.Google Scholar
Apicella, C. L., Marlowe, F. W., Fowler, J. H. & Christakis, N. A. (2012) Social networks and cooperation in hunter-gatherers. Nature 481:497–501.Google Scholar
Arthur, C. (2012) Digital wars: Apple, Google, Microsoft and the battle for the Internet. Kogan Page Publishers.Google Scholar
Barth, F. (1969) Ethnic groups and boundaries. Little Brown and Company.Google Scholar
Baumgartner, F. R., Berry, J. M., Hojnacki, M., Kimball, D. C. & Leech, B. L. (2009) Lobbying and policy change: Who wins, who loses, and why. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Cronk, L. & Gerkey, D. (2007) Kinship and descent. In: The Oxford handbook of evolutionary psychology, ed. Dunbar, R. I. M. & Barrett, L., pp. 463–78. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cronk, L. & Leech, B. L. (2013) Meeting at Grand Central: Understanding the social and evolutionary roots of cooperation. Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Durkheim, E. (1895/1964) The rules of the sociological method, trans. Solovay, Sarah A. and Mueller, John H., ed. Catlin, George E.G.. Free Press.Google Scholar
Fuller, R. C. (2001) Spiritual but not religious: Understanding unchurched America. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Jackson, M. O. (2008) Social and economic networks. Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keesing, R. (1975) Kin groups and social structure. Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.Google Scholar
Maynard Smith, J. (1998) The origin of altruism. Nature 393:639–40.Google Scholar
Nolin, D. (2011) Kin preference and partner choice: Patrilineal descent and biological kinship in Lamaleran cooperative relationships. Human Nature 22:156–76.Google Scholar
Okasha, S. (2006) Evolution and the levels of selection. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Pacheco, J. M., Traulsen, A., Ohtsuki, H. & Nowak, M. A. (2008) Repeated games and direct reciprocity under active linking. Journal of Theoretical Biology 250:726–31.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stark, R. (1996) The rise of Christianity. Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sterelny, K. (1996) The return of the group. Philosophy of Science 63:562–84.Google Scholar
Wasserman, S. & Faust, K. (1994) Social network analysis: Methods and applications. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wilson, D. S. (1975) A theory of group selection. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 72:143–46.Google Scholar