Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Comment
  • Published:

Insights into human cooperation from comparative economics

Many species face the problems of how, when and with whom to cooperate. Comparing responses across species can reveal the evolutionary trajectory of these decisions, including in humans. Using nearly identical economic game methods to compare species could identify the evolutionary constraints and catalysts to cooperation.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: An advantage of games derived from experimental economics is the ability to test different decision-making situations identically across species.

(a and c): Bart Wilson (Chapman University)

Fig. 2: Three common games used in comparative experimental economics research include the assurance game, the hawk–dove game and the matching pennies game.

References

  1. Melis, A. P., Hare, B. & Tomasello, M. Science 311, 1297–1300 (2006).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Ostrom, E. Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 2015).

  3. Hamann, K., Warneken, F., Greenberg, J. R. & Tomasello, M. Nature 476, 328–331 (2011).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Marshall-Pescini, S., Schwarz, J. F. L., Kostelnik, I., Virányi, Z. & Range, F. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114, 11793–11798 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Brosnan, S. F. et al. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108, 3442–3447 (2011).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Brosnan, S. F., Wilson, B. J. & Beran, M. J. Proc. R. Soc. B 279, 1522–1530 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Bullinger, A. F., Wyman, E., Melis, A. P. & Tomasello, M. Int. J. Primatol. 32, 1296–1310 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Cason, T. N., Sheremeta, R. M. & Zhang, J. Games Econ. Behav. 76, 26–43 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Brosnan, S. F. et al. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 142, 293–306 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Martin, C. F., Bhui, R., Bossaerts, P., Matsuzawa, T. & Camerer, C. Sci. Rep. 4, 5182 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by funding from the National Science Foundation grants SES 1123897 and SES 1658867 awarded to S.F.B. and M. Beran.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sarah F. Brosnan.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The author declares no competing interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Brosnan, S.F. Insights into human cooperation from comparative economics. Nat Hum Behav 2, 432–434 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-018-0383-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-018-0383-7

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing