Encyclopedia of Evolutionary Psychological Science

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

Helping and Inclusive Fitness Benefits to Helper

  • Bela BirkasEmail author
Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16999-6_1557-1

Synonyms

Definition

Inclusive fitness is the sum of direct (personal) fitness and indirect fitness of the organism. Direct fitness is the number of offspring the individual procreates, whereas indirect fitness is defined by the number of offspring begotten by the genetic relatives of the individual. To the extent of the genetic relatedness, descendants of relatives share a proportion of copies of the individual’s genes. Thus, helping genetically related individuals, also aids the reproduction of the shared genes, providing additional (indirect) benefits for the altruist (Hamilton 1964).

Introduction

Both direct and indirect fitness benefits could account for the evolution of altruism, and therefore in several cases it is difficult to separate them. Hamilton suggested a formula to define the conditions under which altruism could spread in a...

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

References

  1. Bereczkei, T., & Dunbar, R. I. (1997). Female-biased reproductive strategies in a Hungarian Gypsy population. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 264(1378), 17–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bereczkei, T., Birkas, B., & Kerekes, Z. (2007). Public charity offer as a proximate factor of evolved reputation-building strategy: An experimental analysis of a real-life situation. Evolution and Human Behavior, 28(4), 277–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Burnstein, E. (2005). Altruism and genetic relatedness. In D. M. Buss (Ed.), The handbook of evolutionary psychology (pp. 528–551). Hoboken: Wiley.Google Scholar
  4. Clutton-Brock, T. (2002). Breeding together: Kin selection and mutualism in cooperative vertebrates. Science, 296(5565), 69–72.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Dawkins, R. (1982). The extended phenotype. Oxford: Freeman.Google Scholar
  6. Dickinson, J. L., & Hatchwell, B. (2004). Fitness consequences of helping. In W. D. Koenig & J. L. Dickinson (Eds.), Ecology and evolution of cooperative breeding in birds (pp. 48–66). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Griffin, A. S., & West, S. A. (2002). Kin selection: Fact and fiction. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 17(1), 15–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hamilton, W. D. (1964). The genetical evolution of social behavior, I and II. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 7, 1–52.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. West, S. A., Griffin, A. S., & Gardner, A. (2007). Evolutionary explanations for cooperation. Current Biology, 17(16), R661–R672.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Zahavi, A., & Zahavi, A. (1997). The handicap principle: A missing part of Darwin’s puzzle. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of PecsPecsHungary