Cargando…

Partner choice does not predict prosociality across countries

Why does human prosociality vary around the world? Evolutionary models and laboratory experiments suggest that possibilities for partner choice (i.e. the ability to leave unprofitable relationships and strike up new ones) should promote cooperation across human societies. Leveraging the Global Prefe...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Claessens, Scott, Kyritsis, Thanos
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Cambridge University Press 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10426035/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37588938
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/ehs.2022.51
_version_ 1785089966070562816
author Claessens, Scott
Kyritsis, Thanos
author_facet Claessens, Scott
Kyritsis, Thanos
author_sort Claessens, Scott
collection PubMed
description Why does human prosociality vary around the world? Evolutionary models and laboratory experiments suggest that possibilities for partner choice (i.e. the ability to leave unprofitable relationships and strike up new ones) should promote cooperation across human societies. Leveraging the Global Preferences Survey (n = 27,125; 27 countries) and the World Values Survey (n = 54,728; 32 countries), we test this theory by estimating the associations between relational mobility, a socioecological measure of partner choice, and a wide variety of prosocial attitudes and behaviours, including impersonal altruism, reciprocity, trust, collective action and moral judgements of antisocial behaviour. Contrary to our pre-registered predictions, we found little evidence that partner choice is related to prosociality across countries. After controlling for shared causes of relational mobility and prosociality – environmental harshness, subsistence style and geographic and linguistic proximity – we found that only altruism and trust in people from another religion are positively related to relational mobility. We did not find positive relationships between relational mobility and reciprocity, generalised trust, collective action or moral judgements. These findings challenge evolutionary theories of human cooperation which emphasise partner choice as a key explanatory mechanism, and highlight the need to generalise models and experiments to global samples.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10426035
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Cambridge University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-104260352023-08-16 Partner choice does not predict prosociality across countries Claessens, Scott Kyritsis, Thanos Evol Hum Sci Research Article Why does human prosociality vary around the world? Evolutionary models and laboratory experiments suggest that possibilities for partner choice (i.e. the ability to leave unprofitable relationships and strike up new ones) should promote cooperation across human societies. Leveraging the Global Preferences Survey (n = 27,125; 27 countries) and the World Values Survey (n = 54,728; 32 countries), we test this theory by estimating the associations between relational mobility, a socioecological measure of partner choice, and a wide variety of prosocial attitudes and behaviours, including impersonal altruism, reciprocity, trust, collective action and moral judgements of antisocial behaviour. Contrary to our pre-registered predictions, we found little evidence that partner choice is related to prosociality across countries. After controlling for shared causes of relational mobility and prosociality – environmental harshness, subsistence style and geographic and linguistic proximity – we found that only altruism and trust in people from another religion are positively related to relational mobility. We did not find positive relationships between relational mobility and reciprocity, generalised trust, collective action or moral judgements. These findings challenge evolutionary theories of human cooperation which emphasise partner choice as a key explanatory mechanism, and highlight the need to generalise models and experiments to global samples. Cambridge University Press 2022-11-21 /pmc/articles/PMC10426035/ /pubmed/37588938 http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/ehs.2022.51 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Claessens, Scott
Kyritsis, Thanos
Partner choice does not predict prosociality across countries
title Partner choice does not predict prosociality across countries
title_full Partner choice does not predict prosociality across countries
title_fullStr Partner choice does not predict prosociality across countries
title_full_unstemmed Partner choice does not predict prosociality across countries
title_short Partner choice does not predict prosociality across countries
title_sort partner choice does not predict prosociality across countries
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10426035/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37588938
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/ehs.2022.51
work_keys_str_mv AT claessensscott partnerchoicedoesnotpredictprosocialityacrosscountries
AT kyritsisthanos partnerchoicedoesnotpredictprosocialityacrosscountries