The evolution of altruism: Game theory in multilevel selection and inclusive fitness

2007 ◽  
Vol 245 (1) ◽  
pp. 26-36 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey A. Fletcher ◽  
Martin Zwick
2014 ◽  
Vol 37 (3) ◽  
pp. 243-254 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul E. Smaldino

AbstractMany of the most important properties of human groups – including properties that may give one group an evolutionary advantage over another – are properly defined only at the level of group organization. Yet at present, most work on the evolution of culture has focused solely on the transmission of individual-level traits. I propose a conceptual extension of the theory of cultural evolution, particularly related to the evolutionary competition between cultural groups. The key concept in this extension is the emergent group-level trait. This type of trait is characterized by the structured organization of differentiated individuals and constitutes a unit of selection that is qualitatively different from selection on groups as defined by traditional multilevel selection (MLS) theory. As a corollary, I argue that the traditional focus on cooperation as the defining feature of human societies has missed an essential feature of cooperative groups. Traditional models of cooperation assume that interacting with one cooperator is equivalent to interacting with any other. However, human groups involve differential roles, meaning that receiving aid from one individual is often preferred to receiving aid from another. In this target article, I discuss the emergence and evolution of group-level traits and the implications for the theory of cultural evolution, including ramifications for the evolution of human cooperation, technology, and cultural institutions, and for the equivalency of multilevel selection and inclusive fitness approaches.


Author(s):  
James A.R. Marshall

This chapter examines which of the equivalent alternative partitions of fitness, including inclusive fitness and group fitness, can be interpreted as being subject to natural selection in a meaningful way. Inclusive fitness theory can deal with subtleties such as nonadditive fitness effects and conditionally expressed phenotypes. However, selection based on inclusive fitness gives equivalent predictions to other models of apparently different evolutionary processes, such as multilevel selection. The chapter considers how we can determine whether inclusive fitness really captures the essence of social evolution and whether inclusive fitness is really maximized by the action of selection, as suggested by William D. Hamilton. It also explains what heritability measures, and whether this makes sense biologically. Finally, it discusses the problem of classifying observed social behaviors in terms of their underlying evolutionary explanations.


1983 ◽  
Vol 219 (1216) ◽  
pp. 315-325 ◽  

Different ways in which evolution can be modelled will be reviewed. Two asexual models - ‘Muller’s ratchet’ and a model due to Eigen and Schuster - both lead to the conclusion that the accuracy of replication must reach a limiting value, but the details are different. In classic population genetics models, difficulties arise if fitnesses depend on interactions with others. Two approaches - ‘trait group’ methods, and game theory - are discussed. If the interacting individuals are relatives, there is again a choice between the exact ‘neighbour-modulated fitness’ approach and the more intuitive ‘inclusive fitness’ method. A more drastic change in the nature of the model arises if the units of the evolving system are not individual organisms, but either genes or species. There are conceptual difficulties which must be clarified before species selection can be analysed mathematically.


Author(s):  
Ein-Ya Gura ◽  
Michael Maschler
Keyword(s):  

Author(s):  
Zhu Han ◽  
Dusit Niyato ◽  
Walid Saad ◽  
Tamer Basar ◽  
Are Hjorungnes

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document