Gender Differences in Cooperation and Competition

Vugt, Mark van; Cremer, David De; Janssen, Dirk P.

doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01842.x

Cited by 463 publications

(185 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

161

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The arguments put forth by Archer (2009) that sexual selection best explained human sex differences in aggression has found strong supporting evidence in tendencies toward competition and cooperation, among other areas. Van Vugt, De Cremer, and Janssen (2007) for example, found that men give more to their groups when such groups are in competition with other groups.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The relationship between physical aggression, foreign policy and moral choices: Phenotypic and genetic findings

McDermott

Hatemi

2016

Aggressive Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous work has demonstrated that both leaders and other individuals vary in dispositional levels of physical aggression, which are genetically influenced. Yet the importance of individual differences in aggression for attitudes toward foreign policy or context-laden moral choices, such as sacrificing the lives of some for the greater good of many, has yet to be fully explored. Given the global importance of such decisions, we undertook this exploration in a sample of 586 Australians, including 250 complete twin pairs. We found that individuals who scored higher on Buss-Perry's physical aggression scale were more likely to support aggressive foreign policy interventions and displayed a more utilitarian moral calculus than those who scored lower on this scale. Furthermore, we found that the majority of variance in physical aggression lay in genetic factors for men, whereas the majority of the variance was in environmental factors for women. The source of covariation between aggression and political choices also differed between the sexes. A combination of genetic and environmental factors accounted for most of the cross-trait correlations among males, whereas common and unique environmental factors accounted for most of the cross-trait correlations among females. We consider the implications of our results for understanding how trait measures of aggression are associated with foreign policy and moral choices, providing evidence for why and how individuals differ in responding to complex social dilemmas. Aggr. Behav. 43:37-46, 2017. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The relationship between physical aggression, foreign policy and moral choices: Phenotypic and genetic findings

McDermott

Hatemi

2016

Aggressive Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…R. Soc. B 281: 20141539 differences in the decision behaviour of men and women in reaction to between-group competition have also been found [71][72][73].…”

Section: (D) Studies On the Psychology Of Human Intergroup Relationsmentioning

confidence: 91%

“…A third alternative perspective on individual motivations for engaging in intergroup aggression is the 'male warrior hypothesis' proposed by van Vugt & co-workers [71,72]. It builds on the observations that it is mostly men who engage in violent intergroup conflicts, that proven warriors seem to be perceived as more attractive and might have increased reproductive success, and that in laboratory experiments men frequently react differently to the presence of intergroup contest than women.…”

Section: (C) the Male Warrior Hypothesismentioning

confidence: 99%

The evolutionary interplay of intergroup conflict and altruism in humans: a review of parochial altruism theory and prospects for its extension

Rusch¹

2014

Proc. R. Soc. B.

153

126

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Drawing on an idea proposed by Darwin, it has recently been hypothesized that violent intergroup conflict might have played a substantial role in the evolution of human cooperativeness and altruism. The central notion of this argument, dubbed 'parochial altruism', is that the two genetic or cultural traits, aggressiveness against the out-groups and cooperativeness towards the in-group, including self-sacrificial altruistic behaviour, might have coevolved in humans. This review assesses the explanatory power of current theories of 'parochial altruism'. After a brief synopsis of the existing literature, two pitfalls in the interpretation of the most widely used models are discussed: potential direct benefits and high relatedness between group members implicitly induced by assumptions about conflict structure and frequency. Then, a number of simplifying assumptions made in the construction of these models are pointed out which currently limit their explanatory power. Next, relevant empirical evidence from several disciplines which could guide future theoretical extensions is reviewed. Finally, selected alternative accounts of evolutionary links between intergroup conflict and intragroup cooperation are briefly discussed which could be integrated with parochial altruism in the future.

show abstract

“…No research, however, has yet examined how others perceive these dangerous, high fWHR males, specifically regarding when and why other individuals might choose to associate with them. Given the coalition-based nature of human evolution and conflict (McDonald, Navarrete, & Van Vugt, 2012;Van Vugt, De Cremer, & Janssen, 2007), understanding the conditional acceptance of these individuals is critical to understanding why fWHR might persist as an honest signal of physical strength or aggression.…”

Section: The Current Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%