Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2399311286> ?p ?o ?g. }
- W2399311286 abstract "An evolutionary account of reactions to a wrong Giulia Andrighetto (giulia.andrighetto@istc.cnr.it) Institute of Cognitive Science and Technology (ISTC-CNR), via San Martino della Battaglia 44, 00185, Rome, Italy European University Institute (EUI), Fiesole, Italy Francesca Giardini (francesca.giardini@istc.cnr.it) Institute of Cognitive Science and Technology (ISTC-CNR), via San Martino della Battaglia 44, 00185, Rome, Italy Rosaria Conte (rosaria.conte@istc.cnr.it) Institute of Cognitive Science and Technology (ISTC-CNR), via San Martino della Battaglia 44, 00185, Rome, Italy Abstract In this work, we propose an evolutionary account of reactions to a wrong as an integrated set. Unlike other theories, we are not interested in revenge, punishment or sanction per se, but in their co-existence. We posit that this variety of reactions is needed in order to achieve different goals, but it also implies an increase in cognitive costs that requires to be explained from an evolutionary perspective. Moving from the identification of the psychological traits that uniquely define each reaction, two concurrent hypotheses are suggested and discussed: either the richness of human social life requests a variety of reactions, or the benefits of single reactions at the psychological level allowed these reactions to be maintained in the social life. Keywords: Evolution; punishment; revenge; sanction; cognitive influencing; norms; enforcing institutions social order. Introduction Human actions are potentially unbounded and much more opportunities are available when other people are involved. When talking about social actions we have to distinguish between actions and reactions, i.e., actions triggered by someone's else previous action. Reactions are a constitutive part of living in societies, and the ability of displaying the appropriate reaction in the right content is extremely important for our “ultra-social” species (Richerson & Boyd 1998, 2005; Hill et al. 2009). The nature and the intensity of reactions depend on both the actor and the triggering action, and it requires the capacity to forecast further reactions and to plan ahead, among other things. Humans are unique under this respect, and everyone has experienced how many reactions the same individual can display in response to the same action, even in the same context. Animals can modulate their reactions, in some cases they can also decide their behaviour on a cost-benefit analysis, but others' representations do not enter this picture (Clutton-Brock & Parker 1995; Jensen et al. 2007). Humans react because of what they believe and want, and because of what they want others to believe and of how they want them to behave. A particularly interesting class of social reactions is that triggered in response to a wrong. Retaliation, revenge, punishment and sanctions have been a matter of interest since the rise of Western culture, as witnessed by the fact that the need to understand and explain motives for reacting to wrongs never ceased since pre-Homeric Greece to these days (for an analysis of the differences among these reactions see Giardini et al. 2010). Philosophers, social scientists, political scientists, psychologists, anthropologists have been striving to answer the fundamental question: why do people react to a wrong? In many circumstances reacting is more costly than standing, it requires some kind of planning, and it also implies the possibility of suffering a counter-reaction. Even more striking, people react to wrongs suffered by strangers, intervene in others' disputes, and sanction others when failing to comply with norms that they are not supposed to enforce. Although several scholars have been interested in explaining the evolution of revenge, punishment and sanction (Lorenz, 1966; Hamilton, 1970; Boyd & Richerson, 1992; Clutton-Brock & Parker 1995; Gardner & West, 2004; Jensen, 2010), these phenomena have been usually considered in isolation and not as a rich and complex repertoire. We propose that revenge, punishment and sanction are different reactions that should not be considered in isolation but as interdependent and complementary. If we look at them as an intertwined set, we need to explain the reason why they are different, but we also need to understand why we still have more than one reaction to an offense, and how the related extra cognitive costs are compensated. Our goal is to explain the decision to apply punishment in terms of the complementary decisions to use neither revenge nor sanction, thus understanding the motives behind each and every reaction. We propose that this variety is necessary because, unlike animals, humans' reactions do not only target the offender's behavior, but also her mental states, as well as the victim's mental states. Comparing different reactions, we highlight an evolutionary trajectory that links revenge, punishment and sanction by explaining costs and benefits of each reaction. Having the opportunity to choose among several responses means higher cognitive costs to select between actions, and to choose the most appropriate one. Therefore, a set of questions arises: Why do we have such a repertoire? Can we identify evolved mechanisms that allowed us to" @default.
- W2399311286 created "2016-06-24" @default.
- W2399311286 creator A5018557029 @default.
- W2399311286 creator A5056557463 @default.
- W2399311286 creator A5071875720 @default.
- W2399311286 date "2013-01-01" @default.
- W2399311286 modified "2023-09-23" @default.
- W2399311286 title "An evolutionary account of reactions to a wrong" @default.
- W2399311286 cites W1491401198 @default.
- W2399311286 cites W1556726625 @default.
- W2399311286 cites W1573084417 @default.
- W2399311286 cites W1981448964 @default.
- W2399311286 cites W1984096171 @default.
- W2399311286 cites W199315196 @default.
- W2399311286 cites W2007512024 @default.
- W2399311286 cites W2026003563 @default.
- W2399311286 cites W2040682840 @default.
- W2399311286 cites W2043989834 @default.
- W2399311286 cites W2047984623 @default.
- W2399311286 cites W2049709864 @default.
- W2399311286 cites W2054446781 @default.
- W2399311286 cites W2054676569 @default.
- W2399311286 cites W2057489914 @default.
- W2399311286 cites W2069819543 @default.
- W2399311286 cites W2081429952 @default.
- W2399311286 cites W2087357474 @default.
- W2399311286 cites W2092951514 @default.
- W2399311286 cites W2095660801 @default.
- W2399311286 cites W2098877713 @default.
- W2399311286 cites W2114340103 @default.
- W2399311286 cites W2139538183 @default.
- W2399311286 cites W2141572305 @default.
- W2399311286 cites W2144228882 @default.
- W2399311286 cites W2147570389 @default.
- W2399311286 cites W2189821821 @default.
- W2399311286 cites W2613019253 @default.
- W2399311286 cites W2764433274 @default.
- W2399311286 cites W2780670740 @default.
- W2399311286 cites W2984678534 @default.
- W2399311286 cites W2999983885 @default.
- W2399311286 cites W3123935201 @default.
- W2399311286 cites W367043469 @default.
- W2399311286 cites W573207186 @default.
- W2399311286 hasPublicationYear "2013" @default.
- W2399311286 type Work @default.
- W2399311286 sameAs 2399311286 @default.
- W2399311286 citedByCount "0" @default.
- W2399311286 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
- W2399311286 hasAuthorship W2399311286A5018557029 @default.
- W2399311286 hasAuthorship W2399311286A5056557463 @default.
- W2399311286 hasAuthorship W2399311286A5071875720 @default.
- W2399311286 hasConcept C10138342 @default.
- W2399311286 hasConcept C127413603 @default.
- W2399311286 hasConcept C136197465 @default.
- W2399311286 hasConcept C154945302 @default.
- W2399311286 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
- W2399311286 hasConcept C162324750 @default.
- W2399311286 hasConcept C169760540 @default.
- W2399311286 hasConcept C169900460 @default.
- W2399311286 hasConcept C182306322 @default.
- W2399311286 hasConcept C2779295839 @default.
- W2399311286 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
- W2399311286 hasConcept C42475967 @default.
- W2399311286 hasConcept C77805123 @default.
- W2399311286 hasConceptScore W2399311286C10138342 @default.
- W2399311286 hasConceptScore W2399311286C127413603 @default.
- W2399311286 hasConceptScore W2399311286C136197465 @default.
- W2399311286 hasConceptScore W2399311286C154945302 @default.
- W2399311286 hasConceptScore W2399311286C15744967 @default.
- W2399311286 hasConceptScore W2399311286C162324750 @default.
- W2399311286 hasConceptScore W2399311286C169760540 @default.
- W2399311286 hasConceptScore W2399311286C169900460 @default.
- W2399311286 hasConceptScore W2399311286C182306322 @default.
- W2399311286 hasConceptScore W2399311286C2779295839 @default.
- W2399311286 hasConceptScore W2399311286C41008148 @default.
- W2399311286 hasConceptScore W2399311286C42475967 @default.
- W2399311286 hasConceptScore W2399311286C77805123 @default.
- W2399311286 hasIssue "35" @default.
- W2399311286 hasLocation W23993112861 @default.
- W2399311286 hasOpenAccess W2399311286 @default.
- W2399311286 hasPrimaryLocation W23993112861 @default.
- W2399311286 hasRelatedWork W113657358 @default.
- W2399311286 hasRelatedWork W1530177579 @default.
- W2399311286 hasRelatedWork W1601444158 @default.
- W2399311286 hasRelatedWork W191019335 @default.
- W2399311286 hasRelatedWork W1915640558 @default.
- W2399311286 hasRelatedWork W1968192458 @default.
- W2399311286 hasRelatedWork W1972412370 @default.
- W2399311286 hasRelatedWork W2056680625 @default.
- W2399311286 hasRelatedWork W2329931607 @default.
- W2399311286 hasRelatedWork W2497725998 @default.
- W2399311286 hasRelatedWork W2768420794 @default.
- W2399311286 hasRelatedWork W2769208687 @default.
- W2399311286 hasRelatedWork W2779896305 @default.
- W2399311286 hasRelatedWork W2945259513 @default.
- W2399311286 hasRelatedWork W2948539305 @default.
- W2399311286 hasRelatedWork W2979247149 @default.
- W2399311286 hasRelatedWork W3167481045 @default.
- W2399311286 hasRelatedWork W44131656 @default.
- W2399311286 hasRelatedWork W62832583 @default.