Encyclopedia of Evolutionary Psychological Science

Living Edition
| Editors: Todd K. Shackelford, Viviana A. Weekes-Shackelford

Altruism in Kin Selection

  • Isis Gomes VasconcelosEmail author
Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16999-6_1361-1

Synonyms

Definition

When an organism behaves to produce benefits for his kinship with a cost for himself.

Introduction

The classical natural selection theory cannot account for scenarios where an animal behaves to promote benefits to others by paying its costs (Hamilton 1963, 1964). One possibility to explain such scenarios may be that the recipient of the altruistic act shares some genes with the behaver. The altruistic act, in this way, may reduce the behaver’s fitness although enhancing his genes fitness, what is known as inclusive fitness. Therefore, altruistic acts toward relatives may be a fitness-enhancing strategy.

Hamilton’s Law of Kinship Altruism

W. D. Hamilton construed his model for the selection of Altruistic acts on a criticism against the idea that an individual behaves in cooperative ways in the benefit of the species. Findings in population genetics at that time already pointed that general adaptive advantages on a group does...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Allen-Arare, W., Gurven, M., & Hill, K. (2008). Reciprocal altruism, rather than kin selection, maintains nepotistic food transfers on an ache reservation. Evolution and Human Behavior, 29(5), 305–318.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2008.03.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Burnstein, E. (2005). Altruism and genetic relatedness. In D. M. Buss (Ed.), The handbook of evolutionary psychology (pp. 528–551). Hoboken: Wiley.Google Scholar
  3. Chapais, B. (2001). Primate nepotism: What is the explanatory value of kin selection. International Journal of Primatology, 22(2), 203–229.  https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005619430744.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dawkins, R. (1976). The selfish gene (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Essock-Vitale, S. M., & Mcguire, M. T. (1980). Predictions derived from the theories of kin selection and reciprocation assessed by anthropological data. Ethology and Sociobiology, 1(3), 233–243.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0162-3095(80)90010-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Gurven, M., Allen-Arave, W., Hill, K., & Hurtado, A. M. (2001). Reservation food sharing among the ache of Paraguay. Human Nature, 12(4), 273–297.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12110-001-1000-3.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Hamilton, W. D. (1963). The evolution of altruistic behavior. The American Naturalist, 97(896), 354–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hamilton, W. D. (1964). The genetical evolution of social behavior. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 7, 1–6.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-5193(64)90038-4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Hare, H., & Trivers, R. L. (1973). Haplodiploidy and the evolution of the social insects. Science, 191, 249–276.Google Scholar
  10. Jaeggi, A. V., & Gurven, M. (2013). Reciprocity explains food sharing in humans and other primates independent of kin selection and tolerated scrounging: A phylogenetic meta-analysis. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 280(1768), 20131615–20131615.  https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2013.1615.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Moore, J. (1992). Dispersal, nepotism, and primate social behavior. International Journal of Primatology, 13(4), 361–378.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02547823.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Morgan, C. J. (1979). Eskimo hunting groups, social kinship, and the possibility of kin selection in humans. Ethology and Sociobiology, 1(1), 83–86.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0162-3095(79)90008-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Mueller, U. G. (1991). Haplodiploidy and the evolution of facultative sex ratios in a primitively eusocial bee. Science, 254(5030), 442–444.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.254.5030.442.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Nowak, M., & Highfield, R. (2011). Super cooperators: altruism, evolution, and why we need each other to succeed. Free press: New York.Google Scholar
  15. Sündstrom, L., Chapuisat, M., & Keller, L. (1996). Conditional manipulation of sex ratios by ant workers: A test of kin selection theory. Science, 274, 993–995.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.274.5289.993.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Wright, S. (1948). Genetics of populations. Encyclopaedia Britannica, 10, 111-A-D-112.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Experimental PsychologyUniversity of São PauloSão PauloBrazil

Section editors and affiliations

  • Farid Pazhoohi
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouverCanada