Skip to main content
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences logoLink to Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
. 2002 May 7;269(1494):881–883. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2002.1964

Donors to charity gain in both indirect reciprocity and political reputation.

Manfred Milinski 1, Dirk Semmann 1, Hans-Jürgen Krambeck 1
PMCID: PMC1690974  PMID: 12028769

Abstract

Darwinian evolution can explain human cooperative behaviour among non-kin by either direct or indirect reciprocity. In the latter case one does not expect a return for an altruistic act from the recipient as with direct reciprocity, but from another member of the social group. However, the widespread human behaviour of donating to poor people outside the social group, for example, to charity organizations, that are unlikely to reciprocate indirectly and thus are equivalent to defectors in the game is still an evolutionary puzzle. Here we show experimentally that donations made in public to a well-known relief organization resulted both in increased income (that the donors received from the members of their group) and in enhanced political reputation (they were elected to represent the interests of their group). Donations may thus function as an honest signal for one's social reliability.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (228.0 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Axelrod R., Hamilton W. D. The evolution of cooperation. Science. 1981 Mar 27;211(4489):1390–1396. doi: 10.1126/science.7466396. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Leimar O., Hammerstein P. Evolution of cooperation through indirect reciprocity. Proc Biol Sci. 2001 Apr 7;268(1468):745–753. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2000.1573. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Lotem A., Fishman M. A., Stone L. Evolution of cooperation between individuals. Nature. 1999 Jul 15;400(6741):226–227. doi: 10.1038/22247. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Milinski M., Semmann D., Bakker T. C., Krambeck H. J. Cooperation through indirect reciprocity: image scoring or standing strategy? Proc Biol Sci. 2001 Dec 7;268(1484):2495–2501. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2001.1809. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Milinski Manfred, Semmann Dirk, Krambeck Hans-Jürgen. Reputation helps solve the 'tragedy of the commons'. Nature. 2002 Jan 24;415(6870):424–426. doi: 10.1038/415424a. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Nowak M. A., Sigmund K. Evolution of indirect reciprocity by image scoring. Nature. 1998 Jun 11;393(6685):573–577. doi: 10.1038/31225. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Nowak M. A., Sigmund K. Social science. Shrewd investments. Science. 2000 May 5;288(5467):819–820. doi: 10.1126/science.288.5467.819. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Nowak M. A., Sigmund K. The dynamics of indirect reciprocity. J Theor Biol. 1998 Oct 21;194(4):561–574. doi: 10.1006/jtbi.1998.0775. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Ostrom E., Burger J., Field C. B., Norgaard R. B., Policansky D. Revisiting the commons: local lessons, global challenges. Science. 1999 Apr 9;284(5412):278–282. doi: 10.1126/science.284.5412.278. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Wedekind C., Milinski M. Cooperation through image scoring in humans. Science. 2000 May 5;288(5467):850–852. doi: 10.1126/science.288.5467.850. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences are provided here courtesy of The Royal Society

RESOURCES