↓ Skip to main content

Game theory and human evolution: A critique of some recent interpretations of experimental games

Overview of attention for article published in Theoretical Population Biology, February 2006
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
3 X users
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages
reddit
1 Redditor
q&a
1 Q&A thread
bluesky
1 Bluesky user

Readers on

mendeley
465 Mendeley
citeulike
7 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Game theory and human evolution: A critique of some recent interpretations of experimental games
Published in
Theoretical Population Biology, February 2006
DOI 10.1016/j.tpb.2005.09.005
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Economists and psychologists have been testing Nash equilibrium predictions of game theory models of human behavior. In many instances, humans do not conform to the predictions. These results are of great interest to biologists because they also raise questions about well-known ESS models of cooperation. Cooperation in certain one-shot, anonymous interactions, and a willingness to punish others at a net cost to oneself are some of the most intriguing deviations from standard theory. One proposed explanation for these results that is receiving increasing attention invokes the cultural group selection of 'other regarding' social norms. We critically review this explanation. We conclude that experimental results reveal limits in two implicit models of cognitive structure commonly employed by economists and evolutionary biologists.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 465 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 16 3%
United Kingdom 11 2%
Germany 8 2%
Switzerland 5 1%
Japan 2 <1%
Hungary 2 <1%
Spain 2 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Other 7 2%
Unknown 409 88%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 132 28%
Researcher 77 17%
Student > Master 58 12%
Student > Bachelor 39 8%
Professor 25 5%
Other 87 19%
Unknown 47 10%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 103 22%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 92 20%
Social Sciences 64 14%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 35 8%
Computer Science 15 3%
Other 90 19%
Unknown 66 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 March 2026.
All research outputs
#3,769,358
of 32,148,871 outputs
Outputs from Theoretical Population Biology
#52
of 732 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,248
of 220,090 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Theoretical Population Biology
#2
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 32,148,871 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 732 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 220,090 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.