IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/tin/wpaper/20160055.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Inclusive Fitness

Author

Listed:
  • Matthijs van Veelen

    (University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands)

  • Benjamin Allen

    (Emmanuel College, Boston, United States)

  • Moshe Hoffman

    (Rady School of Management, UC San Diego, United States)

  • Burton Simon

    (University of Colorado, Denver, United States)

  • Carl Veller

    (Harvard University, Cambridge, United States)

Abstract

This paper reviews and addresses a variety of issues relating to inclusive fitness. The main question is: are there limits to the generality of inclusive fitness, and if so, what are the perimeters of the domain within which inclusive fitness works? This question is addressed using two well known tools from evolutionary theory: the replicator dynamics, and adaptive dynamics. Both are combined with population structure. How generally Hamilton's rule applies depends on how costs and benefits are defined. We therefore consider costs and benefits following from Karlin & Matessi's (1983) "counterfactual method", and costs and benefits as defined by the "regression method" (Gardner et al., 2011). With the latter definition of costs and benefits, Hamilton's rule always indicates the direction of selection correctly, and with the former it does not. How these two definitions can meaningfully be interpreted is also discussed. We also consider cases where the qualitative claim that relatedness fosters cooperation holds, even if Hamilton's rule as a quantitative prediction does not. We furthermore find out what the relation is between Hamilton's rule and Fisher's Fundamental Theorem of Natural Selection. We also consider cancellation effects - which is the most important deepening of our understanding of when altruism is selected for - and we discuss preference evolution. Finally we also explore the remarkable (im)possibilities for empirical testing with either definition of costs and benefits in Hamilton's rule.

Suggested Citation

  • Matthijs van Veelen & Benjamin Allen & Moshe Hoffman & Burton Simon & Carl Veller, 2016. "Inclusive Fitness," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 16-055/I, Tinbergen Institute.
    • Handle: RePEc:tin:wpaper:20160055
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://papers.tinbergen.nl/16055.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Vincent A. A. Jansen & Minus van Baalen, 2006. "Altruism through beard chromodynamics," Nature, Nature, vol. 440(7084), pages 663-666, March.
    2. Debra Lieberman & John Tooby & Leda Cosmides, 2007. "The architecture of human kin detection," Nature, Nature, vol. 445(7129), pages 727-731, February.
    3. Van Huyck, John B & Battalio, Raymond C & Beil, Richard O, 1990. "Tacit Coordination Games, Strategic Uncertainty, and Coordination Failure," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(1), pages 234-248, March.
    4. James W. Friedman, 1971. "A Non-cooperative Equilibrium for Supergames," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 38(1), pages 1-12.
    5. Erez Lieberman & Christoph Hauert & Martin A. Nowak, 2005. "Evolutionary dynamics on graphs," Nature, Nature, vol. 433(7023), pages 312-316, January.
    6. Matthijs Veelen & Peter Spreij, 2009. "Evolution in games with a continuous action space," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 39(3), pages 355-376, June.
    7. Drew Fudenberg & Eric Maskin, 2008. "The Folk Theorem In Repeated Games With Discounting Or With Incomplete Information," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Drew Fudenberg & David K Levine (ed.), A Long-Run Collaboration On Long-Run Games, chapter 11, pages 209-230, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    8. Francisco C. Santos & Marta D. Santos & Jorge M. Pacheco, 2008. "Social diversity promotes the emergence of cooperation in public goods games," Nature, Nature, vol. 454(7201), pages 213-216, July.
    9. Binmore, Kenneth G. & Samuelson, Larry, 1992. "Evolutionary stability in repeated games played by finite automata," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 278-305, August.
    10. Matthijs van Veelen, 2007. "Evolution of Strategies in Repeated Games with Discounting," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 06-115/1, Tinbergen Institute.
    11. Frank, Robert H, 1987. "If Homo Economicus Could Choose His Own Utility Function, Would He Want One with a Conscience?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(4), pages 593-604, September.
    12. Arthur J. Robson, 2001. "The Biological Basis of Economic Behavior," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 39(1), pages 11-33, March.
    13. U. Dieckmann & R. Law, 1996. "The Dynamical Theory of Coevolution: A Derivation from Stochastic Ecological Processes," Working Papers wp96001, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
    14. García, Julián & van Veelen, Matthijs, 2016. "In and out of equilibrium I: Evolution of strategies in repeated games with discounting," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 161-189.
    15. Hisashi Ohtsuki & Christoph Hauert & Erez Lieberman & Martin A. Nowak, 2006. "A simple rule for the evolution of cooperation on graphs and social networks," Nature, Nature, vol. 441(7092), pages 502-505, May.
    16. Fudenberg, Drew & Maskin, Eric, 1990. "Evolution and Cooperation in Noisy Repeated Games," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(2), pages 274-279, May.
    17. Rick L. Riolo & Michael D. Cohen & Robert Axelrod, 2001. "Evolution of cooperation without reciprocity," Nature, Nature, vol. 414(6862), pages 441-443, November.
    18. Martin A. Nowak & Akira Sasaki & Christine Taylor & Drew Fudenberg, 2004. "Emergence of cooperation and evolutionary stability in finite populations," Nature, Nature, vol. 428(6983), pages 646-650, April.
    19. Volij, Oscar, 2002. "In Defense of DEFECT," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 309-321, May.
    20. Alan H. Krakauer, 2005. "Kin selection and cooperative courtship in wild turkeys," Nature, Nature, vol. 434(7029), pages 69-72, March.
    21. Eddie Dekel & Jeffrey C. Ely & Okan Yilankaya, 2007. "Evolution of Preferences -super-1," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 74(3), pages 685-704.
    22. Åke Brännström & Jacob Johansson & Niels Von Festenberg, 2013. "The Hitchhiker’s Guide to Adaptive Dynamics," Games, MDPI, vol. 4(3), pages 1-25, June.
    23. Matthijs van Veelen & Shishi Luo & Burton Simon, 2014. "A Simple Model of Group Selection that cannot be analyzed with Inclusive Fitness," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 14-013/I, Tinbergen Institute.
    24. Ken Binmore, 1994. "Game Theory and the Social Contract, Volume 1: Playing Fair," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262023636, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. van Veelen, Matthijs & García, Julián, 2019. "In and out of equilibrium II: Evolution in repeated games with discounting and complexity costs," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 113-130.
    2. Matthijs van Veelen, 2020. "The evolution of morality," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 20-063/I, Tinbergen Institute.
    3. García, Julián & van Veelen, Matthijs, 2016. "In and out of equilibrium I: Evolution of strategies in repeated games with discounting," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 161-189.
    4. Zhang, Huanren, 2018. "Errors can increase cooperation in finite populations," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 203-219.
    5. Kroumi, Dhaker & Lessard, Sabin, 2015. "Evolution of cooperation in a multidimensional phenotype space," Theoretical Population Biology, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 60-75.
    6. Charles G Nathanson & Corina E Tarnita & Martin A Nowak, 2009. "Calculating Evolutionary Dynamics in Structured Populations," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(12), pages 1-7, December.
    7. Saral, Ali Seyhun, 2020. "Evolution of Conditional Cooperation in Prisoner's Dilemma," OSF Preprints wcpkz, Center for Open Science.
    8. Benjamin M Zagorsky & Johannes G Reiter & Krishnendu Chatterjee & Martin A Nowak, 2013. "Forgiver Triumphs in Alternating Prisoner's Dilemma," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(12), pages 1-8, December.
    9. Faqi Du & Feng Fu, 2011. "Partner Selection Shapes the Strategic and Topological Evolution of Cooperation," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 1(3), pages 354-369, September.
    10. Dimitris Iliopoulos & Arend Hintze & Christoph Adami, 2010. "Critical Dynamics in the Evolution of Stochastic Strategies for the Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(10), pages 1-8, October.
    11. Drew Fudenberg & David G. Rand & Anna Dreber, 2012. "Slow to Anger and Fast to Forgive: Cooperation in an Uncertain World," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(2), pages 720-749, April.
    12. Pedro Dal Bo & Guillaume R. Frechette, 2007. "The Evolution of Cooperation in Infinitely Repeated Games: Experimental Evidence," Working Papers 2007-7, Brown University, Department of Economics.
    13. Fabio Della Rossa & Fabio Dercole & Anna Di Meglio, 2020. "Direct Reciprocity and Model-Predictive Strategy Update Explain the Network Reciprocity Observed in Socioeconomic Networks," Games, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-28, March.
    14. Sarkar, Bijan, 2021. "The cooperation–defection evolution on social networks," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 584(C).
    15. Ueda, Masahiko, 2023. "Memory-two strategies forming symmetric mutual reinforcement learning equilibrium in repeated prisoners’ dilemma game," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 444(C).
    16. Zhijian Wang & Yanran Zhou & Jaimie W. Lien & Jie Zheng & Bin Xu, 2016. "Extortion Can Outperform Generosity in the Iterated Prisoners' Dilemma," Levine's Bibliography 786969000000001297, UCLA Department of Economics.
    17. Matthijs van Veelen, 2002. "Altruism, Fairness and Evolution: the Case for Repeated Stochastic Games," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 02-111/1, Tinbergen Institute.
    18. Flávio L Pinheiro & Jorge M Pacheco & Francisco C Santos, 2012. "From Local to Global Dilemmas in Social Networks," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(2), pages 1-6, February.
    19. Sethi, Rajiv & Somanathan, E., 2003. "Understanding reciprocity," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 50(1), pages 1-27, January.
    20. Jiawei Li & Graham Kendall, 2015. "On Nash Equilibrium and Evolutionarily Stable States That Are Not Characterised by the Folk Theorem," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(8), pages 1-9, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Inclusive fitness; Hamilton's rule; Fisher's fundamental theorem of natural selection; replicator dynamics; adaptive dynamics; regression method; counterfactual method; preference evolution; empirical test; comparative statics;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C73 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Stochastic and Dynamic Games; Evolutionary Games

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:tin:wpaper:20160055. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Tinbergen Office +31 (0)10-4088900 (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/tinbenl.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.