Article published in:
Interaction Studies
Vol. 17:1 (2016) ► pp. 1–25

On the reliability of unreliable information

Gossip as cultural memory

| Department of Computer Science, University of Bath, UK
| Department of Computer Science, University of Bath, UK | Center for Information Technology Policy, Princeton University, USA
| Department of Computer Science, University of Bath, UK | Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School, University of Oxford, UK
| Department of Psychology, Universidad de Los Andes, Bogotá, Colombia
When individuals learn from what others tell them, the information is subject to transmission error that does not arise in learning from direct experience. Yet evidence shows that humans consistently prefer this apparently more unreliable source of information. We examine the effect this preference has in cases where the information concerns a judgment on others’ behaviour and is used to establish cooperation in a society. We present a spatial model confirming that cooperation can be sustained by gossip containing a high degree of uncertainty. Accuracy alone does not predict the value of information in evolutionary terms; relevance, the impact of information on behavioural outcomes, must also be considered. We then show that once relevance is incorporated as a criterion, second-hand information can no longer be discounted on the basis of its poor fidelity alone. Finally we show that the relative importance of accuracy and relevance depends on factors of life history and demography.
Keywords: gossip, reputation, cooperation, social norm
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Methods
    • 2.1Model
      • 2.1.1Individual interactions: the donation game
      • 2.1.2Reputation assigned by observers according to a social norm
      • 2.1.3Reputation impacts on individual choice of action
      • 2.1.4Evolution according to payoff
    • 2.2Experiment 1. Judgments made without full knowledge
      • 2.2.1Method
      • 2.2.2Simulation
      • 2.2.3Results and discussion
    • 2.3Experiment 2. Agents’ knowledge of reputations differs according to the spread of gossip
      • 2.3.1Method
      • 2.3.2Results and discussion
      • 2.3.3Formal analysis of an ALLD agent’s reputation
      • 2.3.4Results and discussion
    • 2.4Experiment 3. Personal experience versus gossip under limited lifespan
      • 2.4.1Method
      • 2.4.2Results and discussion
      • 2.4.3Formal analysis of gossip versus direct observation
      • 2.4.4Results and discussion
  • 3.General discussion
  • 4.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgments
  • Note
  • References
Published online: 07 October 2016
https://doi.org/10.1075/is.17.1.01mit
References
Abbink, K., Brandts, J., Herrmann, B., and Orzen, H.
(2012) Parochial altruism in inter-group conflicts. Economics Letters, 117(1):45–48. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Alexander, R. D.
(1987) The Biology of Moral Systems. Foundations of Human Behavior. Aldine de Gruyter, New York.Google Scholar
Alizon, S. and Taylor, P.
(2008) Empty sites can promote altruistic behaviour. Evolution, 62(6):1335–1344. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Asch, S. E.
(1956) Studies of independence and conformity: I. a minority of one against a unanimous majority. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 70(9):1–70. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Axelrod, R. and Hamilton, W. D.
(1981) The evolution of cooperation. Science, 2111:1390–1396. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dawkins, R.
(1976) Hierarchical organisation: A candidate principle for ethology. In Bateson, P. P. G. and Hinde, R. A., editors, Growing Points in Ethology, pages 7–54. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Dessalles, J.-L.
(2007) Why we talk: the evolutionary origins of language. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Enquist, M. and Leimar, O.
(1993) The evolution of cooperation in mobile organisms. Animal Behaviour, 451:747–757. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fahle, M. and Poggio, T.
(1981) Visual hyperacuity: Spatiotemporal interpolation in human vision. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 213(1193):451–477. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gergely, G., Bekkering, H., and Király, I.
(2002) Rational imitation in preverbal infants. Nature, 415:755.Google Scholar
Gergely, G. and Csibra, G.
(2006) Sylvia’s recipe: the role of imitation and pedagogy in the transmission of cultural knowledge, pages 229–255. Roots of Human Sociality: Culture, Cognition and Interaction. Berg, New York.Google Scholar
Goldberg, D. and Deb, K.
(1991) A comparative analysis of selection schemes used in genetic algorithms. Urbana, 511:61801–2996.Google Scholar
Gruber, T., Poisot, T., Zuberbühler, K., Hoppitt, W., and Hobaiter, C.
(2015) The spread of a novel behavior in wild chimpanzees: New insights into the ape cultural mind. Communicative & Integrative Biology, 8(2):e1017164. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hardin, G.
(1968) The tragedy of the commons. Science, 1621:1243–1248. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Henrich, J. and McElreath, R.
(2003) The evolution of cultural evolution. Evolutionary Anthropology: Issues, News, and Reviews, 12(3):123–135. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hess, N. and Hagen, E.
(2006) Psychological adaptations for assessing gossip veracity. Human Nature, 17(3):337–354. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jacobs, R. A., Jordan, M. I., Nowlan, S. J., and Hinton, G. E.
(1991) Adaptive mixtures of local experts. Neural computation, 3(1):79–87. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kao, A. B. and Couzin, I. D.
(2014) Decision accuracy in complex environments is often maximized by small group sizes. Proceedings ofthe Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 281(1784).Google Scholar
Kokko, H.
(1997) Evolutionarily stable strategies of age-dependent sexual advertisement. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 41(2):99–107. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
McElreath, R. and Boyd, R.
(2007) Mathematical models of social evolution: A guide for the perplexed. University of Chicago Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Meltzoff, A. N.
(1988) Infant imitation after a 1-week delay: Long-term memory for novel acts and multiple stimuli. Developmental psychology, 24(4):470. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Milinski, M., Semmann, D., and Krambeck, H.-J.
(2006) Reputation helps solve the tragedy of the commons. Nature, 415(6870). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Moravec, H. P.
(1988) Sensor fusion in certainty grids for mobile robots. AI magazine, 9(2):61.Google Scholar
Nagell, K., Olguin, R. S., and Tomasello, M.
(1993) Processes of social learning in the tool use of chimpanzees (pan troglodytes) and human children (homo sapiens). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 107(2):174–186. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nakamura, M. and Masuda, N.
(2011) Indirect reciprocity under incomplete observation. PLoS Computational Biology, 7(7):e1002113. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nowak, M. A. and Sigmund, K.
(1998) Evolution of indirect reciprocity by image scoring. Nature, 3931:573–577. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2005) Evolution of indirect reciprocity. Nature, 4371:1291–1298. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ohtsuki, H. and Iwasa, Y.
(2006) The leading eight: Social norms that can maintain cooperation by indirect reciprocity. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 239(4):435–444. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ohtsuki, H., Iwasa, Y., and Nowak, M. A.
(2009) Indirect reciprocity provides only a narrow margin of efficiency for costly punishment. Nature, 457(7225):79–82. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rand, D. G., Nowak, M. A., Fowler, J. H., and Christakis, N. A.
(2014) Static network structure can stabilize human cooperation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(48):17093–17098. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rauwolf, P., Mitchell, D., and Bryson, J. J.
(2015) Value homophily benefits cooperation but motivates employing incorrect social information. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 367(0):246–261. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Richerson, P. J. and Boyd, R.
(2005) Not by Genes Alone: How Culture Transformed Human Evolution. Chicago University Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
Roberts, G.
(2008) Evolution of direct and indirect reciprocity. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 275(1631):173–179. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schelling, T.
(1960) The strategy of conflict. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Scott-Phillips, T. C.
(2008) Defining biological communication. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 21(2):387–395. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sommerfeld, R. D., Krambeck, H. J., Semmann, D., and Milinski, M.
(2007) Gossip as an alternative for direct observation in games of indirect reciprocity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 104(44):17435–17440. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sperber, D. and Wilson, D.
(1995) Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Wiley.Google Scholar
Taylor, D. J.
(2014) Evolution of the Social Contract. PhD thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of Bath.Google Scholar
Tomasello, M.
(1999) The Cultural Origins of Human Cognition. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Trivers, R. L.
(1971) The evolution of reciprocal altruism. Quarterly Review of Biology, 46(1):35–57. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Čače, I. and Bryson, J. J.
(2007) Agent based modelling of communication costs: Why information can be free. In Lyon, C., Nehaniv, C. L., and Cangelosi, A., editors, Emergence and Evolution of Linguistic Communication, pages 305–322. Springer, London. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Whiten, A., McGuigan, N., Marshall-Pescini, S., and Hopper, L. M.
(2009) Emulation, imitation, over-imitation and the scope of culture for child and chimpanzee. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 364(1528):2417–2428. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Williams, G. C.
(1966) Adaptation and Natural Selection. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Yoo, J. H.
(2009) The power of sharing negative information in a dyadic context. Communication Reports, 22(1):29–40. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 2 other publications

Okafuji, Yuki, Jun Baba, Junya Nakanishi, Itaru Kuramoto, Kohei Ogawa, Yuichiro Yoshikawa & Hiroshi Ishiguro
2020. Can a humanoid robot continue to draw attention in an office environment?. Advanced Robotics 34:14 ► pp. 931 ff. Crossref logo
Rudnicki, Konrad, Carolyn Declerck, Charlotte De Backer & Mario Berth
2019. Physiological changes during first encounters and their role in determining the perceived interaction quality. Interaction Studies. Social Behaviour and Communication in Biological and Artificial Systems 20:2 ► pp. 275 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 15 april 2022. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.