Intergroup Aggression in Chimpanzees and War in Nomadic Hunter-Gatherers: Evaluating the Chimpanzee Model

The evolution of democratic peace in animal societies

A major goal in evolutionary biology is to elucidate common principles that drive human and other animal societies to adopt either a warlike or peaceful nature. One proposed explanation for the variation in aggression between human societies is the democratic peace hypothesis. According to this theory, autocracies are more warlike than democracies because autocratic leaders can pursue fights for private gain. However, autocratic and democratic decision-making processes are not unique to humans and are widely observed across a diverse range of non-human animal societies. We use evolutionary game theory to evaluate whether the logic of democratic peace may apply across taxa; specifically adapting the classic Hawk-Dove model to consider conflict decisions made by groups rather than individuals. We find support for the democratic peace hypothesis without mechanisms involving complex human institutions and discuss how these findings might be relevant to non-human animal societies. We suggest that the degree to which collective decisions are shared may explain variation in the intensity of intergroup conflict in nature.

Patrilineal segmentary systems provide a peaceful explanation for the post-Neolithic Y-chromosome bottleneck

Studies have found a pronounced decline in male effective population sizes worldwide around 3000-5000 years ago. This bottleneck was not observed for female effective population sizes, which continued to increase over time. Until now, this remarkable genetic pattern was interpreted as the result of an ancient structuring of human populations into patrilineal groups (gathering closely related males) violently competing with each other. In this scenario, violence is responsible for the repeated extinctions of patrilineal groups, leading to a significant reduction in male effective population size. Here, we propose an alternative hypothesis by modelling a segmentary patrilineal system based on anthropological literature. We show that variance in reproductive success between patrilineal groups, combined with lineal fission (i.e., the splitting of a group into two new groups of patrilineally related individuals), can lead to a substantial reduction in the male effective population size without resorting to the violence hypothesis. Thus, a peaceful explanation involving ancient changes in social structures, linked to global changes in subsistence systems, may be sufficient to explain the reported decline in Y-chromosome diversity.

Janus faced: The co-evolution of war and peace in the human species

The human species presents a paradox. No other species possesses the propensity to carry out coalitionary lethal attacks on adult conspecifics coupled with the inclination to establish peaceful relations with genetically unrelated groups. What explains this seemingly contradictory feature? Existing perspectives, the "deep roots" and "shallow roots" of war theses, fail to capture the plasticity of human intergroup behaviors, spanning from peaceful cooperation to warfare. By contrast, this article argues that peace and war have both deep roots, and they co-evolved through an incremental process over several million years. On the one hand, humans inherited the propensity for coalitionary lethal violence from their chimpanzee-like ancestor. Specifically, having first inherited the skills to engage in cooperative hunting, they gradually repurposed such capacity to execute coalitionary killings of adult conspecifics and subsequently enhanced it through technological innovations like the use of weapons. On the other hand, they underwent a process of cumulative cultural evolution and, subsequently, of self-domestication which led to heightened cooperative communication and increased prosocial behavior within and between groups. The combination of these two biocultural evolutionary processes-coupled with feedback loop effects between self-domestication and Pleistocene environmental variability-considerably broadened the human intergroup behavioral repertoire, thereby producing the distinctive combination of conflictual and peaceful intergroup relations that characterizes our species. To substantiate this argument, the article synthesizes and integrates the findings from a variety of disciplines, leveraging evidence from evolutionary anthropology, primatology, archeology, paleo-genetics, and paleo-climatology.

Dyadic inter-group cooperation in shotgun hunting activities in a Congo Basin village

Understanding the dynamics of inter-group cooperation in human adaptation has been the subject of recent empirical and theoretical studies in evolutionary anthropology, beginning to fill gaps in our knowledge of how interactions across political, economic and social domains can - and often do - lead to stable, large-scale cooperation. Here we investigate dyadic intergroup cooperation in shotgun hunting in the Republic of the Congo. In the Congo Basin, inter-group cooperation between foragers and farmers is at the centre of an exchange system maintained by traditional norms and institutions such as fictive kinship. Here, we focused on what factors predict cooperative shotgun hunting exchanges between BaYaka and Yambe. We conducted structured interviews with 48 BaYaka hunters and 18 Yambe men who organise hunts in a village along the Motaba River. We used Bayesian multilevel regression models to investigate the influence of Yambe and BaYaka attributes on probability of dyadic cooperation. We found that BaYaka men's reputations as skilled hunters and their family size each predicted cooperation in shotgun hunting, whereas there was no effect of Yambe attributes (status, wealth, family size). We discuss the results in terms of evolutionary models of men as hunters and inter-group cooperation, as well as biodiversity conservation implications.

Chimpanzees make tactical use of high elevation in territorial contexts

Tactical warfare is considered a driver of the evolution of human cognition. One such tactic, considered unique to humans, is collective use of high elevation in territorial conflicts. This enables early detection of rivals and low-risk maneuvers, based on information gathered. Whether other animals use such tactics is unknown. With a unique dataset of 3 years of simultaneous behavioral and ranging data on 2 neighboring groups of western chimpanzees, from the Taï National Park, Côte d'Ivoire, we tested whether chimpanzees make decisions consistent with tactical use of topography to gain an advantage over rivals. We show that chimpanzees are more likely to use high hills when traveling to, rather than away from, the border where conflict typically takes place. Once on border hills, chimpanzees favor activities that facilitate information gathering about rivals. Upon leaving hills, movement decisions conformed with lowest risk engagement, indicating that higher elevation facilitates the detection of rivals presence or absence. Our results support the idea that elevation use facilitated rival information gathering and appropriate tactical maneuvers. Landscape use during territorial maneuvers in natural contexts suggests chimpanzees seek otherwise inaccessible information to adjust their behavior and points to the use of sophisticated cognitive abilities, commensurate with selection for cognition in species where individuals gain benefits from coordinated territorial defense. We advocate territorial contexts as a key paradigm for unpicking complex animal cognition.

Evidence of the active participation of women in the intergroup conflict based on the use of aggression and cooperation

Intergroup conflict has been a persistent aspect of human societies since the emergence of our species. Various researchers have proposed that competition between groups has acted as a key selective force throughout human evolutionary history. Such intergroup competition for limited resources exacerbated the expression of intergroup aggression and intragroup cooperation. Furthermore, it would have a sexual dimorphism, with men demonstrating increased sensitivity to conflict threats-in order to maximize reproductive opportunities-, while women generally reject from active engagement in intergroup conflict. In the present study, we conducted behavioral experiments under controlled laboratory conditions to measure cooperation and aggression from using virtual games, specifically the Public Good Games and the Point Subtraction Aggression Paradigm, in a sample of 541 participants. We created control and experimental intergroup competition scenarios, where aggression and cooperation were necessary to increase monetary rewards. Our results shows that men modulate aggression and cooperation in the presence of intergroup conflict. In addition, our data also reveals that women cooperate more than men and display heightened levels of cooperation and aggression when confronted with intergroup conflict. These findings prompt a reevaluation of current functional theoretical models concerning the role of women in intergroup conflict and suggest that the dynamics of human aggression and cooperation may be more nuanced than previously believed.

Wartime forced sex as a male mating strategy

The aim of this study was an analytical justification of the emergence and presence of the phenomenon of war among hominins, taking into account males' genetic benefits gained through war in the natural environment. Based on chimpanzee behavior, the analytical model of the primary warrior balance was explored, comparing the risk of a war expedition with the genetic profits from war rape-"life and death balance". On the profits side, genetic gains possible to obtain in terms of permanent attractiveness of females (warrior status and abductions of females) were also included. Kin cooperation, parochial altruism, and "partisan strategy" have been defined as psychological mechanisms that enable effective group violence. Male genetic benefit from a war rape could exceed the risk of a warrior's death in the chimpanzee-human LCA species; transition from the herd to the patriarchal tribal social system could increase warrior's genetic gains from war. At the root of war lie sexual limitations of cooperating males, induced by female sexual preferences and lack of the permanent female sexual drive. War rape allows reproductive success for dominated and thus sexually restricted males. Tendencies for group aggression to gain access to out-group females (the war gene) are common among sexually restricted men. Resource-rich areas favor increase in human population density, this affects group territoriality and promotes intergroup conflicts, and thus patriarchy. Roots of conventional patriarchal marriage are strongly combined with war-"the right to land entails the right to a female".

Using video games to understand sex differences in attentional biases for weapons

Attentional biases for threatening stimuli of various kinds have been repeatedly demonstrated. More recently, sex differences in the strength of visual biases for weapons have been observed, with men exhibiting stronger biases than do women. In the current study we further explored this sex difference, by examining how immediate vicarious experience with weapons (via playing a violent video game compared to playing a non-violent video game) affected the visual attention for weapons. We found that the basic visual bias for weapons compared to non-weapons was replicated, as was the sex difference in the strength of this bias. We also observed that the context produced by playing a violent video game prior to the visual search task, produced some sex differences in responding that were not present after playing the nonviolent video game, providing modest evidence that men may be more prone to cognitive behavioural effects of violent video game play. Interestingly, there was some evidence that both sexes de-prioritised non-weapons during search after playing the violent, relative to the non-violent, video game. We recommend that future studies investigate the task dynamics that may have led to this effect.

The evolution of peace

While some species have affiliative and even cooperative interactions between individuals of different social groups, humans are alone in having durable, positive-sum, interdependent relationships across unrelated social groups. Our capacity to have harmonious relationships that cross group boundaries is an important aspect of our species' success, allowing for the exchange of ideas, materials, and ultimately enabling cumulative cultural evolution. Knowledge about the conditions required for peaceful intergroup relationships is critical for understanding the success of our species and building a more peaceful world. How do humans create harmonious relationships across group boundaries and when did this capacity emerge in the human lineage? Answering these questions involves considering the costs and benefits of intergroup cooperation and aggression, for oneself, one's group, and one's neighbor. Taking a game theoretical perspective provides new insights into the difficulties of removing the threat of war and reveals an ironic logic to peace - the factors that enable peace also facilitate the increased scale and destructiveness of conflict. In what follows, I explore the conditions required for peace, why they are so difficult to achieve, and when we expect peace to have emerged in the human lineage. I argue that intergroup cooperation was an important component of human relationships and a selective force in our species history beginning at least 300 thousand years. But the preconditions for peace only emerged in the past 100 thousand years and likely coexisted with intermittent intergroup violence which would have also been an important and selective force in our species' history.

The primate workplace: Cooperative decision-making in human and non-human primates

The success of group foraging in primates is not only determined by ecological and social factors. It is also influenced by cognition. Group foraging success is constrained, for instance, by the challenges of coordination, synchrony and decision-making, and it is enhanced by the ability to share, learn from others and coordinate actions. However, what we currently know about the cognition of individuals in groups comes primarily from experiments on dyads, and what we know of the effect of ecological factors on group dynamics comes from larger wild groups. Our current knowledge of primate group behaviour is thus incomplete. In this review, we identify a gap in our knowledge of primate group dynamics between the dyadic studies on primate cooperation and the large group observational studies of behavioural ecology. We highlight the potential for controlled experimental studies on coordination and cooperation in primate groups. Currently, these exist primarily as studies of dyads, and these do not go far enough in testing limits of group-level behaviours. Controlled studies on primate groups beyond the dyad would be highly informative regarding the bounds of non-human primate collaboration. We look to the literature on how humans behave in groups, specifically from organisational psychology, draw parallels between human and non-human group dynamics and highlight approaches that could be applied across disciplines. Organisational psychology is explicitly concerned with the interactions between individuals in a group and the emergent properties at the group-level of these decisions. We propose that some of the major shortfalls in our understanding of primate social cognition and group dynamics can be filled by using approaches developed by organisational psychologists, particularly regarding the effects of group size and composition on group-level cooperation. To illustrate the potential applications, we provide a list of research questions drawn from organisational psychology that could be applied to non-human primates.

Strategic intergroup alliances increase access to a contested resource in male bottlenose dolphins

Cooperation between allied individuals is ubiquitous in human societies. Our capacity to build strategic cooperative relationships across multiple social levels, such as trade or military alliances both nationally and internationally, is thought to be unique to our species. Here, however, we show that male bottlenose dolphins form the largest known multilevel alliance network outside humans, where the cooperative relationships between groups, rather than alliance size, increases male access to a contested resource. These results reveal that both dolphins and humans form strategic intergroup alliances between unrelated individuals, likely selecting for enhanced social cognition. This surprising case of convergence suggests that dolphin societies, as well as those of nonhuman primates, are valuable model systems for understanding human social and cognitive evolution.

Efforts to understand human social evolution rely largely on comparisons with nonhuman primates. However, a population of bottlenose dolphins in Shark Bay, Western Australia, combines a chimpanzee-like fission-fusion grouping pattern, mating system, and life history with the only nonhuman example of strategic multilevel male alliances. Unrelated male dolphins form three alliance levels, or “orders”, in competition over females: both within-group alliances (i.e., first- and second-order) and between-group alliances (third-order), based on cooperation between two or more second-order alliances against other groups. Both sexes navigate an open society with a continuous mosaic of overlapping home ranges. Here, we use comprehensive association and consortship data to examine fine-scale alliance relationships among 121 adult males. This analysis reveals the largest nonhuman alliance network known, with highly differentiated relationships among individuals. Each male is connected, directly or indirectly, to every other male, including direct connections with adult males outside of their three-level alliance network. We further show that the duration with which males consort females is dependent upon being well connected with third-order allies, independently of the effect of their second-order alliance connections, i.e., alliances between groups increase access to a contested resource, thereby increasing reproductive success. Models of human social evolution traditionally link intergroup alliances to other divergent human traits, such as pair bonds, but our study reveals that intergroup male alliances can arise directly from a chimpanzee-like, promiscuous mating system without one-male units, pair bonds, or male parental care.

Characterization of Pan social systems reveals in-group/out-group distinction and out-group tolerance in bonobos

Human between-group interactions are highly variable, ranging from violent to tolerant and affiliative. Tolerance between groups is linked to our unique capacity for large-scale cooperation and cumulative culture, but its evolutionary origins are understudied. In chimpanzees, one of our closest living relatives, predominantly hostile between-group interactions impede cooperation and information flow across groups. In contrast, in our other closest living relative, the bonobo, tolerant between-group associations are observed. However, as these associations can be frequent and prolonged and involve social interactions that mirror those within groups, it is unclear whether these bonobos really do belong to separate groups. Alternatively, the bonobo grouping patterns may be homologous to observations from the large Ngogo chimpanzee community, where individuals form within-group neighborhoods despite sharing the same membership in the larger group. To characterize bonobo grouping patterns, we compare the social structure of the Kokolopori bonobos with the chimpanzee group of Ngogo. Using cluster analysis, we find temporally stable clusters only in bonobos. Despite the large spatial overlap and frequent interactions between the bonobo clusters, we identified significant association preference within but not between clusters and a unique space use of each cluster. Although bonobo associations are flexible (i.e., fission-fusion dynamics), cluster membership predicted the bonobo fission compositions and the spatial cohesion of individuals during encounters. These findings suggest the presence of a social system that combines clear in-group/out-group distinction and out-group tolerance in bonobos, offering a unique referential model for the evolution of tolerant between-group interactions in humans.

Key individuals catalyse intergroup violence

Intergroup violence is challenging to understand: why do individuals cooperate to harm members of other groups when they themselves may be killed or injured? Despite progress in understanding the evolutionary and proximate mechanisms that underlie violence, we still have little insight into the processes that lead to the emergence of coalitionary aggression. We argue that an overlooked component is the presence of individuals who have a crucial role in initiating violence. In instigating intergroup violence, these key individuals may expect to face lower costs, receive greater benefits, or garner benefits that have a greater value to them than others. Alternatively, key individuals may be motivated by individual traits such as increased boldness, propensity for aggression or exploratory behaviour. Key individuals catalyse the emergence of coalitionary violence through one of several processes including altering the costs and benefits that accrue to others, paying a greater share of the startup costs, signalling privileged knowledge, or providing coordination, among other factors. Here we integrate diverse lines of empirical research from humans and non-human animals demonstrating that inter-individual variation is an important factor in the emergence of intergroup violence. Focusing on the role of key individuals provides new insights into how and why violence emerges. This article is part of the theme issue 'Intergroup conflict across taxa'.

Turkana warriors' call to arms: how an egalitarian society mobilizes for cattle raids

Humans are able to overcome coordination and collective action problems to mobilize for large-scale intergroup conflict even without formal hierarchical political institutions. To better understand how people rally together for warfare, I examine how the politically decentralized Turkana pastoralists in Kenya assemble raiding parties. Based on accounts of 54 Turkana battles obtained from semi-structured interviews with Turkana warriors, I describe the precipitating factors, recruitment process, exhortations and leadership involved in marshalling a raiding party. Details of this ethnographic case shed light on how voluntary informal armies are mobilized, and illustrate how culturally evolved institutions harness our cooperative dispositions at multiple scales to produce large-scale warfare. This article is part of the theme issue 'Intergroup conflict across taxa'.

Parochial cooperation in wild chimpanzees: a model to explain the evolution of parochial altruism

Parochial altruism, taking individual costs to benefit the in-group and harm the out-group, has been proposed as one of the mechanisms underlying the human ability of large-scale cooperation. How parochial altruism has evolved remains unclear. In this review paper, we formulate a parochial cooperation model in small-scale groups and examine the model in wild chimpanzees. As suggested for human parochial altruism, we review evidence that the oxytocinergic system and in-group cooperation and cohesion during out-group threat are integral parts of chimpanzee collective action during intergroup competition. We expand this model by suggesting that chimpanzee parochial cooperation is supported by the social structure of chimpanzee groups which enables repeated interaction history and established social ties between co-operators. We discuss in detail the role of the oxytocinergic system in supporting parochial cooperation, a pathway that appears integral already in chimpanzees. The reviewed evidence suggests that prerequisites of human parochial altruism were probably present in the last common ancestor between Pan and Homo. This article is part of the theme issue 'Intergroup conflict across taxa'.

How Language and Human Altruism Evolved Hand in Hand - The Backchannel Hypothesis

This paper contributes to two debates: the debate about language evolution and the debate about the foundations of human collaboration. While both cooperation and language may give the impression of being adaptations that evolved for the "good of the group," it is well established that the evolution of complex traits cannot be a direct result of group selection. In this paper I suggest how this tension can be solved: both language and cooperation evolved in a unique two-level evolutionary system which was triggered by a well-documented geological event-the drying out of the climate-in East Africa, which subsequently reduced the intermating between groups and thus made it possible that the mechanism that produced differences between groups (including social forms of selection such as female choice) could be the target of natural selection on the group level. If a social form of selection (e.g., sexual selection) produced differences in fitness between groups, the displacement process between groups would indirectly select those forms of social selection that produce groups that would displace all others. The main hypothesis presented in this paper is that, in this situation, a backchannel between the two levels of selection naturally evolves. A backchannel between the two levels would, for example, emerge when sexual selection (or any other form of social selection) was sensitive to the individual's contribution to the group. Examples of systems utilizing a backchannel are nerve cells being better nourished when used more frequently, enabling them to be conducive to the survival of the whole organism, or a law firm in which all employees get paid to the extent that they contribute to the survival and success of the firm. In both cases, the selection on the higher level informs the selection on the lower level. The aim of the paper is to illuminate these rather opaque claims, to which the reader probably has many objections in this abridged form.

Disguises and the Origins of Clothing

Thermoregulation is often thought to be a key motivating factor behind the origins of clothing. Less attention has been given, however, to the production and use of clothing across traditional societies in contexts outside of thermoregulatory needs. Here I investigate the use of disguises, modesty coverings, and body armor among the 10 hunter-gatherer societies in the Probability Sample Files (PSF) within the Human Relations Area Files (HRAF) World Cultures database, with a particular focus on disguise cases and how they compare with strategies of deception across other taxa. The employment of disguises-defined as altering one's appearance for purposes of deceiving conspecifics or other animals-is noted for eight of the 10 societies, with their use occurring in contexts of hunting, religious or cult practices, and war or interpersonal violence. Most hunter-gatherer disguises demonstrated clear similarities to cases of visual deception found in other species, with the majority of examples fitting categories of animal mimicry, masquerading as plants, disruptive coloration (camouflage), or background matching (camouflage), while disguises unique to humans involved the impersonation of culture-specific "spirit-beings." Clothing for modesty purposes (nine societies) and body armor (six societies) are also noted. I propose that strategic initiatives by individuals or groups to disguise or conceal themselves represents one possible initial pathway to the cultural evolution of clothing. There are likely multiple potential (nonexclusive) social and functional pathways to the emergence of clothing outside of thermoregulatory needs.

Territorial blueprint in the hippocampal system

As we skillfully navigate through familiar places, neural computations of distances and coordinates escape our attention. However, we perceive clearly the division of space into socially meaningful territories. 'My space' versus 'your space' is a distinction familiar to all of us. Spatial frontiers are social in nature since they regulate individuals' access to utilities in space depending on hierarchy and affiliation. How does the brain integrate spatial geometry with social territory? We propose that the action of oxytocin (OT) in the entorhinal-hippocampal regions supports this process. Grounded on the functional role of the hypothalamic neuropeptide in the hippocampal system, we show how OT-induced plasticity may bias the geometrical coding of place and grid cells to represent social territories.

Social and ecological dominance orientations: Two sides of the same coin? Social and ecological dominance orientations predict decreased support for climate change mitigation policies

In this article, we examine the roles of social dominance orientation (SDO) and ecological dominance orientation (EDO) as predictors of climate change risk and threat perceptions and associated pro-environmental policy support. EDO is a novel measure that we devised based on social dominance theory to assess general preferences for an anthropocentric, hierarchical arrangement between humans, non-human animals, and the natural environment. Across two pre-registered studies ( N = 715; USA and Germany) our results indicate that SDO and EDO are uniquely associated with decreased support for climate change mitigation policies benefitting humans, non-human animals, and the natural environment. These relationships in turn are partially mediated by decreased climate change risk and threat perceptions. We successfully replicate our findings using a more behavioral measure as dependent variable. Notably, using a more behavioral measure (Study 2), EDO was significantly associated with pro-environmental behavior but not SDO, when threats are accounted for as mediators.

Human Self-Domestication and the Evolution of Pragmatics

As proposed for the emergence of modern languages, we argue that modern uses of languages (pragmatics) also evolved gradually in our species under the effects of human self-domestication, with three key aspects involved in a complex feedback loop: (a) a reduction in reactive aggression, (b) the sophistication of language structure (with emerging grammars initially facilitating the transition from physical aggression to verbal aggression); and (c) the potentiation of pragmatic principles governing conversation, including, but not limited to, turn-taking and inferential abilities. Our core hypothesis is that the reduction in reactive aggression, one of the key factors in self-domestication processes, enabled us to fully exploit our cognitive and interactional potential as applied to linguistic exchanges, and ultimately to evolve a specific form of communication governed by persuasive reciprocity-a trait of human conversation characterized by both competition and cooperation. In turn, both early crude forms of language, well suited for verbal aggression/insult, and later more sophisticated forms of language, well suited for persuasive reciprocity, significantly contributed to the resolution and reduction of (physical) aggression, thus having a return effect on the self-domestication processes. Supporting evidence for our proposal, as well as grounds for further testing, comes mainly from the consideration of cognitive disorders, which typically simultaneously present abnormal features of self-domestication (including aggressive behavior) and problems with pragmatics and social functioning. While various approaches to language evolution typically reduce it to a single factor, our approach considers language evolution as a multifactorial process, with each player acting upon the other, engaging in an intense mutually reinforcing feedback loop. Moreover, we see language evolution as a gradual process, continuous with the pre-linguistic cognitive abilities, which were engaged in a positive feedback loop with linguistic innovations, and where gene-culture co-evolution and cultural niche construction were the main driving forces.

Hidden order across online extremist movements can be disrupted by nudging collective chemistry

Disrupting the emergence and evolution of potentially violent online extremist movements is a crucial challenge. Extremism research has analyzed such movements in detail, focusing on individual- and movement-level characteristics. But are there system-level commonalities in the ways these movements emerge and grow? Here we compare the growth of the Boogaloos, a new and increasingly prominent U.S. extremist movement, to the growth of online support for ISIS, a militant, terrorist organization based in the Middle East that follows a radical version of Islam. We show that the early dynamics of these two online movements follow the same mathematical order despite their stark ideological, geographical, and cultural differences. The evolution of both movements, across scales, follows a single shockwave equation that accounts for heterogeneity in online interactions. These scientific properties suggest specific policies to address online extremism and radicalization. We show how actions by social media platforms could disrupt the onset and 'flatten the curve' of such online extremism by nudging its collective chemistry. Our results provide a system-level understanding of the emergence of extremist movements that yields fresh insight into their evolution and possible interventions to limit their growth.

The evolution of altruism through war is highly sensitive to population structure and to civilian and fighter mortality

The importance of warfare in the evolution of human social behavior remains highly debated. One hypothesis is that intense warfare between groups favored altruism within groups, a hypothesis given some support by computational modeling and, in particular, the work of Choi and Bowles [J.-K. Choi, S. Bowles, Science 318, 636-640 (2007)]. The results of computational models are, however, sensitive to chosen parameter values and a deeper assessment of the plausibility of the parochial altruism hypothesis requires exploring this model in more detail. Here, I use a recently developed method to reexamine Choi and Bowles' model under a much broader range of conditions to those used in the original paper. Although the evolution of altruism is robust to perturbations in most of the default parameters, it is highly sensitive to group size and migration and to the lethality of war. The results show that the degree of genetic differentiation between groups (FST ) produced by Choi and Bowles' original model is much greater than empirical estimates of FST between hunter-gatherer groups. When FST in the model is close to empirically observed values, altruism does not evolve. These results cast doubt on the importance of war in the evolution of human sociality.

The correct way to test the hypothesis that racial categorization is a byproduct of an evolved alliance-tracking capacity

The project of identifying the cognitive mechanisms or information-processing functions that cause people to categorize others by their race is one of the longest-standing and socially-impactful scientific issues in all of the behavioral sciences. This paper addresses a critical issue with one of the few hypotheses in this area that has thus far been successful-the alliance hypothesis of race-which had predicted a set of experimental circumstances that appeared to selectively target and modify people's implicit categorization of others by their race. Here, we will show why the evidence put forward in favor of this hypothesis was not in fact evidence in support of the hypothesis, contrary to common understanding. We will then provide the necessary and crucial tests of the hypothesis in the context of conflictual alliances, determining if the predictions of the alliance hypothesis of racial categorization in fact hold up to experimental scrutiny. When adequately tested, we find that indeed categorization by race is selectively reduced when crossed with membership in antagonistic alliances-the very pattern predicted by the alliance hypothesis. This finding provides direct experimental evidence that the human mind treats race as proxy for alliance membership, implying that racial categorization does not reflect attention to physical features per se, but rather to social relationships.

The character of conflict: A bioarchaeological study of violence in the Nasca highlands of Peru during the Late Intermediate Period (950-1450 C.E.)

OBJECTIVES

This study uses osteological and radiocarbon datasets combined with formal quantitative analyses to test hypotheses concerning the character of conflict in the Nasca highlands during the Late Intermediate Period (LIP, 950-1450 C.E.). We develop and test osteological expectations regarding what patterns should be observed if violence was characterized by intragroup violence, ritual conflict, intermittent raiding, or internecine warfare.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Crania (n = 267) were examined for antemortem and perimortem, overkill, and critical trauma. All age groups and both sexes are represented in the sample. One hundred twenty-four crania were AMS dated, allowing a detailed analysis of diachronic patterns in violence among various demographic groups.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight percent (102/267) of crania exhibit some form of cranial trauma, a significant increase from the preceding Middle Horizon era. There are distinct trauma frequencies within the three subphases of the LIP, but Phase III (1300-1450 C.E.) exhibits the highest frequencies of all trauma types. Males exhibit significantly more antemortem trauma than females, but both exhibit similar perimortem trauma rates.

DISCUSSION

There was chronic, internecine warfare throughout the Late Intermediate Period with important variations in violence throughout the three temporal phases. Evidence for heterogeneity in violent mortality shows a pattern consistent with social substitutability, whereby any and all members of the Nasca highland population were appropriate targets for lethal and sublethal violence. We argue that by testing hypotheses regarding the targets and types of conflict we are better able to explain the causes and consequences of human conflict.

An Adaptationist Framework for Personality Science

The field of personality psychology aspires to construct an overarching theory of human nature and individual differences: one that specifies the psychological mechanisms that underpin both universal and variable aspects of thought, emotion, and behaviour. Here, we argue that the adaptationist toolkit of evolutionary psychology provides a powerful meta–theory for characterizing the psychological mechanisms that give rise to within–person, between–person, and cross–cultural variations. We first outline a mechanism–centred adaptationist framework for personality science, which makes a clear ontological distinction between (i) psychological mechanisms designed to generate behavioural decisions and (ii) heuristic trait concepts that function to perceive, describe, and influence others behaviour and reputation in everyday life. We illustrate the utility of the adaptationist framework by reporting three empirical studies. Each study supports the hypothesis that the anger programme—a putative emotional adaptation—is a behaviour–regulating mechanism whose outputs are described in the parlance of the person description factor called ‘Agreeableness’. We conclude that the most productive way forward is to build theory–based models of specific psychological mechanisms, including their culturally evolved design features, until they constitute a comprehensive depiction of human nature and its multifaceted variations. © 2020 European Association of Personality Psychology

Exploitative leaders incite intergroup warfare in a social mammal

A classic explanation for the prevalence of complex warfare in human societies is leadership by exploitative individuals who reap the benefits of conflict while avoiding the costs. Here, we extend the classic hawk−dove model to show that leadership of this kind can also explain the evolution of severe collective violence in certain animal societies. We test our model using long-term data from wild banded mongooses, and show that female leaders incite fights with rival groups to gain genetic benefits, while males bear the costs of fighting. The result is unusually severe levels of intergroup violence. Our findings suggest that the decoupling of leaders from the costs that they incite amplifies the destructive nature of intergroup conflict.

Collective conflicts among humans are widespread, although often highly destructive. A classic explanation for the prevalence of such warfare in some human societies is leadership by self-serving individuals that reap the benefits of conflict while other members of society pay the costs. Here, we show that leadership of this kind can also explain the evolution of collective violence in certain animal societies. We first extend the classic hawk−dove model of the evolution of animal aggression to consider cases in which a subset of individuals within each group may initiate fights in which all group members become involved. We show that leadership of this kind, when combined with inequalities in the payoffs of fighting, can lead to the evolution of severe intergroup aggression, with negative consequences for population mean fitness. We test our model using long-term data from wild banded mongooses, a species characterized by frequent intergroup conflicts that have very different fitness consequences for male and female group members. The data show that aggressive encounters between groups are initiated by females, who gain fitness benefits from mating with extragroup males in the midst of battle, whereas the costs of fighting are borne chiefly by males. In line with the model predictions, the result is unusually severe levels of intergroup violence. Our findings suggest that the decoupling of leaders from the costs that they incite amplifies the destructive nature of intergroup conflict.

The Origins and Psychology of Human Cooperation

Humans are an ultrasocial species. This sociality, however, cannot be fully explained by the canonical approaches found in evolutionary biology, psychology, or economics. Understanding our unique social psychology requires accounting not only for the breadth and intensity of human cooperation but also for the variation found across societies, over history, and among behavioral domains. Here, we introduce an expanded evolutionary approach that considers how genetic and cultural evolution, and their interaction, may have shaped both the reliably developing features of our minds and the well-documented differences in cultural psychologies around the globe. We review the major evolutionary mechanisms that have been proposed to explain human cooperation, including kinship, reciprocity, reputation, signaling, and punishment; we discuss key culture-gene coevolutionary hypotheses, such as those surrounding self-domestication and norm psychology; and we consider the role of religions and marriage systems. Empirically, we synthesize experimental and observational evidence from studies of children and adults from diverse societies with research among nonhuman primates.

Group dominance increases territory size and reduces neighbour pressure in wild chimpanzees

Territorial social species, including humans, compete between groups over key resources. This between-group competition has evolutionary implications on adaptations like in-group cooperation even with non-kin. An emergent property of between-group competition is group dominance. Mechanisms of group dominance in wild animal populations are difficult to study, as they require long-term data on several groups within a population. Here, using long-term data on four neighbouring groups of wild western chimpanzees, we test the hypothesis that group dominance impacts the costs and benefits of between-group competition, measured by territory size and the pressure exerted by neighbouring groups. Larger groups had larger territories and suffered less neighbour pressure compared with smaller groups. Within-group increase in the number of males led to territory increase, suggesting the role of males in territory acquisition. However, variation in territory sizes and neighbour pressure was better explained by group size. This suggests that the bisexually-bonded social system of western chimpanzees, where females participate in territorial behaviour, confers a competitive advantage to larger groups and that group dominance acts through group size in this population. Considering variation in social systems offers new insights on how group dominance acts in territorial species and its evolutionary implications on within-group cooperation.

Western gorilla space use suggests territoriality

The evolutionary origins of how modern humans share and use space are often modelled on the territorial-based violence of chimpanzees, with limited comparison to other apes. Gorillas are widely assumed to be non-territorial due to their large home ranges, extensive range overlap, and limited inter-group aggression. Using large-scale camera trapping, we monitored western gorillas in Republic of Congo across 60 km². Avoidance patterns between groups were consistent with an understanding of the “ownership” of specific regions, with greater avoidance of their neighbours the closer they were to their neighbours’ home range centres. Groups also avoided larger groups’ home ranges to a greater extent, consistent with stronger defensive responses from more dominant groups. Our results suggest that groups may show territoriality, defending core regions of their home ranges against neighbours, and mirror patterns common across human evolution, with core areas of resident dominance and larger zones of mutual tolerance. This implies western gorillas may be a key system for understanding how humans have evolved the capacity for extreme territorial-based violence and warfare, whilst also engaging in the strong affiliative inter-group relationships necessary for large-scale cooperation.

Human large-scale cooperation as a product of competition between cultural groups

A fundamental puzzle of human evolution is how we evolved to cooperate with genetically unrelated strangers in transient interactions. Group-level selection on culturally differentiated populations is one proposed explanation. We evaluate a central untested prediction of Cultural Group Selection theory, by assessing whether readiness to cooperate between individuals from different groups corresponds to the degree of cultural similarity between those groups. We documented the normative beliefs and cooperative dispositions of 759 individuals spanning nine clans nested within four pastoral ethnic groups of Kenya-the Turkana, Samburu, Rendille and Borana. We find that cooperation between groups is predicted by how culturally similar they are, suggesting that norms of cooperation in these societies have evolved under the influence of group-level selection on cultural variation. Such selection acting over human evolutionary history may explain why we cooperate readily with unrelated and unfamiliar individuals, and why humans' unprecedented cooperative flexibility is nevertheless culturally parochial.

Intergroup aggression in meerkats

Violent conflicts between groups have been observed among many species of group living mammals and can have important fitness consequences, with individuals being injured or killed and with losing groups surrendering territory. Here, we explore between-group conflict among meerkats (Suricata suricatta), a highly social and cooperatively breeding mongoose. We show that interactions between meerkat groups are frequently aggressive and sometimes escalate to fighting and lethal violence and that these interactions have consequences for group territories, with losing groups moving to sleeping burrows closer to the centre of their territories following an intergroup interaction and with winning groups moving further away. We find that larger groups and groups with pups are significantly more likely to win contests, but that the location of the contest, adult sex ratio, and mean within-group genetic relatedness do not predict contest outcome. Our results suggest that intergroup competition may be a major selective force among meerkats, reinforcing the success of large groups and increasing the vulnerability of small groups to extinction. The presence of both within-group cooperation and between-group hostility in meerkats make them a valuable point of comparison in attempts to understand the ecological and evolutionary roots of human warfare.

From Physical Aggression to Verbal Behavior: Language Evolution and Self-Domestication Feedback Loop

We propose that human self-domestication favored the emergence of a less aggressive phenotype in our species, more precisely phenotype prone to replace (reactive) physical aggression with verbal aggression. In turn, the (gradual) transition to verbal aggression and to more sophisticated forms of verbal behavior favored self-domestication, with the two processes engaged in a mutually reinforcing feedback loop, considering that verbal behavior entails not only less violence and better survival but also more opportunities to interact longer and socialize with more conspecifics, ultimately enabling the emergence of more complex forms of language. Whereas in the case of self-domestication, sexual selection has been proposed to work against physical aggression traits, in the case of verbal insult, the selection has been proposed to work in favor of verbal aggression. The tension between these two seemingly opposing forces gets resolved/alleviated by a tendency to replace physical aggression with verbal aggression and with verbal behavior more generally. This also helps solve the paradox of the Self-Domestication Hypothesis regarding aggression, more precisely why aggression in humans has been reduced only when it comes to reactive aggression, but not when it comes to proactive aggression, the latter exhibiting an increase in the advent of modern language. We postulate that this feedback loop was particularly important during the time period arguably between 200 and 50 kya, when humans were not fully modern, neither in terms of their skull/brain morphology and their behavior/culture nor in terms of their self-domestication. The novelty of our approach lies in (1) giving an active role to early forms of language in interacting with self-domestication processes; (2) providing specific linguistic details and functions of this early stage of grammar (including insult and humor); (3) supplying neurobiological, ontogenetic, and clinical evidence of a link between (reactive) aggression and (reactive) verbal behavior; (4) identifying proxies of the earlier stages in evolution among cognitive disorders; and (5) identifying specific points of contact and mutual reinforcement between these two processes (self-domestication and early language evolution), including reduction in physical aggression and stress/tension, as well as sexual selection.

Intergroup Competition Enhances Chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes verus) In-group Cohesion

In-group cohesion is an essential component of successful intergroup competition in both human and nonhuman animals, likely facilitating group members access to potential benefits. However, when benefits are equally shared among group members, group defense becomes a collective action problem, which might subvert cohesive participation during intergroup competition. There is a lack of consensus across studies and species with regard to the link between in-group cohesion and intergroup competition, likely as a result of species differences in managing the collective action problem. Here, we examine this link in a species with a striking example of collective action during intergroup competition, chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes verus). Using two years of focal-follow data on males and females in two groups at the Taï Forest, Côte d’Ivoire, we investigated the immediate and long-term effects of intergroup competition (border patrols and intergroup encounters) on measures of in-group cohesion, namely modularity, party size, and intergroup aggression. We found that groups’ association patterns were less modular (more cohesive) in months in which they engaged in more border patrols and intergroup encounters. We found that current and greater prior engagement in intergroup competition predicted larger party sizes. Furthermore, current, but not prior engagement in intergroup competition, predicted reduced intragroup aggression by males but not by females. Increased in-group cohesion in chimpanzees likely reduces potential costs of intergroup competition engagement, by facilitating joint participation in current and future intergroup conflicts, overcoming the collective action problem.

The Impacts of Conservation and Militarization on Indigenous Peoples : A Southern African San Perspective

There has been a long-standing debate about the roles of San in the militaries of southern Africa and the prevalence of violence among the Ju/'hoansi and other San people. The evolutionary anthropology and social anthropological debates over the contexts in which violence and warfare occurs among hunters and gatherers are considered, as is the "tribal zone theory" of warfare between states and indigenous people. This paper assesses the issues that arise from these discussions, drawing on data from San in Angola, Namibia, Botswana, and Zimbabwe. Utilizing cases of how San have been affected by military forces and wildlife conservation agencies in what became protected areas in southern Africa, this article shows that indigenous peoples have been treated differentially by state and nongovernmental organizations involved in anti-poaching, shoot-to-kill, and forced resettlement policies. Particular emphasis is placed on the !Xun and Khwe San of southern Angola and northern Namibia and the Tshwa San of western Zimbabwe and northern Botswana, who have been impacted by militarization and coercive conservation efforts since the late nineteenth century. Principal conclusions are that conservation and militarization efforts have led to a reduction in land and resources available to indigenous people, higher levels of poverty, increased socioeconomic stratification, and lower levels of physical well-being. San have responded to these trends by engaging in social activism, forming community-based institutions, and pursuing legal actions aimed at obtaining human rights and equitable treatment.

Universality and diversity in human song

What is universal about music, and what varies? We built a corpus of ethnographic text on musical behavior from a representative sample of the world's societies, as well as a discography of audio recordings. The ethnographic corpus reveals that music (including songs with words) appears in every society observed; that music varies along three dimensions (formality, arousal, religiosity), more within societies than across them; and that music is associated with certain behavioral contexts such as infant care, healing, dance, and love. The discography-analyzed through machine summaries, amateur and expert listener ratings, and manual transcriptions-reveals that acoustic features of songs predict their primary behavioral context; that tonality is widespread, perhaps universal; that music varies in rhythmic and melodic complexity; and that elements of melodies and rhythms found worldwide follow power laws.

Warfare in an evolutionary perspective

The importance of warfare for human evolution is hotly debated in anthropology. Some authors hypothesize that warfare emerged at least 200,000-100,000 years BP, was frequent, and significantly shaped human social evolution. Other authors claim that warfare is a recent phenomenon, linked to the emergence of agriculture, and mostly explained by cultural rather than evolutionary forces. Here I highlight and critically evaluate six controversial points on the evolutionary bases of warfare. I argue that cultural and evolutionary explanations on the emergence of warfare are not alternative but analyze biological diversity at two distinct levels. An evolved propensity to act aggressively toward outgroup individuals may emerge irrespective of whether warfare appeared early/late during human evolution. Finally, I argue that lethal violence and aggression toward outgroup individuals are two linked but distinct phenomena, and that war and peace are complementary and should not always be treated as two mutually exclusive behavioral responses.

The importance of raiding ecology and sex differences in offensive and defensive warfare

De Dreu and Gross offer a compelling synthesis of a growing literature on the psychology of attack and defense. I argue that human raiding ecology suggests the need to endogenize attacker-defender move order as well as opportunities for tactical mismatch available to defenders. Perhaps most significantly, I draw attention to the surprising lacunae in sex differences across attack and defense.

Using the research on intergroup conflict in nonhuman animals to help inform patterns of human intergroup conflict

There is a large body of research on conflict in nonhuman animal groups that measures the costs and benefits of intergroup conflict, and we suggest that much of this evidence is missing from De Dreu and Gross's interesting article. It is a shame this work has been missed, because it provides evidence for interesting ideas put forward in the article.

Reasons to strike first

De Dreu and Gross predict that attackers will have more difficulty winning conflicts than defenders. As their analysis is presumed to capture the dynamics of decentralized conflict, we consider how their framework compares with ethnographic evidence from small-scale societies, as well as chimpanzee patterns of intergroup conflict. In these contexts, attackers have significantly more success in conflict than predicted by De Dreu and Gross's model. We discuss the possible reasons for this disparity.