Indirect selection and individual selection in sociobiology: my personal views on theories of social behaviour

This is the story of my involvement in sociobiological studies. I first discuss group selection models, which were common in the 1950s. I then move on to kin selection and reciprocity models, which were developed to replace group selection models and are still being used by many sociobiologists, even though I argue that they contain the same weaknesses that led group selection to be rejected. As an alternative, I present the handicap principle, an essential component in all signalling. The handicap principle is useful in understanding many components of social systems, not the least of which is why individuals invest in the benefit of other members of a social system (altruism). Copyright 2003 Published by Elsevier Science Ltd on behalf of The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour.

[1]  A Grafen,et al.  Sexual selection unhandicapped by the Fisher process. , 1990, Journal of theoretical biology.

[2]  W. Hamilton.  The genetical evolution of social behaviour. I. , 1964, Journal of theoretical biology.

[3]  J. Davis,et al.  Sexual selection for a handicap: a critical analysis of Zahavi's model. , 1976, Journal of theoretical biology.

[4]  A. Zahavi.  Mate selection-a selection for a handicap. , 1975, Journal of theoretical biology.

[5]  A. Zahavi.  The testing of a bond , 1977, Animal Behaviour.

[6]  William Rowan,et al.  The Study of Instinct , 1953 .

[7]  A. Zahavi.  The cost of honesty (further remarks on the handicap principle). , 1977, Journal of theoretical biology.

[8]  D. E. Matthews.  Evolution and the Theory of Games , 1977 .

[9]  R. Trivers.  The Evolution of Reciprocal Altruism , 1971, The Quarterly Review of Biology.

[10]  A. Zahavi.  Reliability in communication systems and the evolution of altruism , 1977 .

[11]  R. Punnett,et al.  The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection , 1930, Nature.

[12]  Oren Hasson,et al.  Sexual displays as amplifiers: practical examples with an emphasis on feather decorations , 1991 .

[13]  Eric Bonabeau.  The handicap principle , 1998, Complex..

[14]  A. Grafen.  Biological signals as handicaps. , 1990, Journal of theoretical biology.

[15]  J. Maynard Smith,et al.  Must reliable signals always be costly? , 1994, Animal Behaviour.

[16]  V. Wynne-Edwards.  Animal dispersion in relation to social behaviour , 1962 .

[17]  G. Williams.  Adaptation and Natural Selection. (Book Reviews: Adaptation and Natural Selection: A Critique of Some Current Evolutionary Thought) , 2018 .

[18]  W. Garrett,et al.  This Week's Citation Classic Tm , 2022 .

[19]  R. Trivers.  Parent-Offspring Conflict , 1974 .

[20]  N. Burley,et al.  Social Evolution, Robert Trivers. Benjamin/Cummings, Menlo Park, Calfornia (1985), xvii, +462, Price £19.95 in U.K., $18.95 in U.S.A. (paperback) , 1986 .

[21]  J. M. Smith.  Group Selection and Kin Selection , 1964, Nature.

[22]  A. Zahavi.  Altruism as a Handicap: The Limitations of Kin Selection and Reciprocity , 1995 .

[23]  A. Zahavi,et al.  Altruistic behaviour in Dictyostelium discoideum explained on the basis of individual selection , 1997 .

[24]  George C. Williams,et al.  Adaptation and Natural Selection , 2018 .

[25]  A Zahavi,et al.  The fallacy of conventional signalling. , 1993, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[26]  R. Tremblay,et al.  On aggression. , 1973, The New England journal of medicine.

[27]  David Granot,et al.  Mate selection in yeast: A reconsideration of the signals and the message encoded by them , 1995 .

[28]  J. Krebs,et al.  Sexual selection and the handicap principle , 1976, Nature.

[29]  Mark Kirkpatrick,et al.  The Handicap Mechanism of Sexual Selection Does Not Work , 1986, The American Naturalist.

[30]  D. Lack,et al.  Population Studies of Birds , 1967 .