The positives of playing favorites

Jul 09, 2012 By Peter Reuell
A study led by Harvard researcher Feng Fu found that in-group favoritism — the tendency of people to help other members of the same group — is critical in establishing high-level cooperation that ultimately benefits the whole. Credit: File photo by Stephanie Mitchell/Harvard Staff Photographer

Though often portrayed as unfair or a character flaw, in many instances “playing favorites can be a winning strategy,” a Harvard researcher says.

As described in a paper in Scientific Reports, a study led by Feng Fu, a postdoctoral researcher at Harvard’s Program for Evolutionary Dynamics, found that in- favoritism — the tendency of people to help other members of the same group — is critical in establishing high-level cooperation that ultimately benefits the whole.

“We found that playing favorites is a winning strategy because it fosters a very high level of in-group cooperation,” Fu said. “So the group benefits a lot as a result of this cooperation. And because the group performs better than others, its members benefit as well. As the group becomes more successful, it attracts new members, and that success reinforces the tendency toward cooperation between group members.”

“Human societies are both highly cooperative and exquisitely organized, and various models have been developed exploring the connection between these two facts,” said Martin Nowak, professor of mathematics and biology, director of the Program for Evolutionary Dynamics, and one of the paper’s co-authors. “We believe that this paper is an important contribution to the growing literature on and evolution of cooperation.”

While the study, published June 21, found that certain conditions — such as the flexibility to move between groups — were necessary to foster in-group cooperation, arguably its most interesting finding was what was not needed: conflict.

“Fighting between groups can promote group solidarity,” Fu said. “But our modeling showed that conflict was not necessary to generate in-group bias; all you need is the group identity. That’s the positive message I think people should take away from this work, that those conflicts aren’t necessary to create a successful group dynamic.”

In-group favoritism, however, isn’t always a given, Fu warned. The more rigid group identity becomes, the study found, the more likely group members are to defect, and begin cooperating with outside groups. Conversely, if group identity is too fluid, the group never truly forms, and cooperation breaks down.

“When groups become extremely rigid, we begin to see a lack of in-group favoritism,” Fu said. “What that says is that flexibility in group identity is absolutely critical to supporting healthy cooperation. There needs to be a balance between flexibility and consistency for a group to succeed.”

The new study, Fu said, was inspired by research conducted by David Rand, postdoctoral fellow in psychology, who had examined group bias among the supporters of Democratic candidates in the 2008 presidential election, and Corina Tarnita, a junior fellow of the Society of Fellows, who had previously worked on evolutionary set theory.

For the current study, Fu and colleagues — including Rand and Tarnita — began by creating a series of theoretical models that explored the conditions that might give rise to in-group favoritism. Armed with predictions from those models, they created a series of computer models that allowed researchers to watch how in- and out-group interactions played out.

“Across many generations, we were able to observe which strategies were successful over this long process,” Fu said. “What we found is that the rules of natural selection could be used to describe the success or failure of a group. Groups that showed a high level of in-group cooperation were more likely to be ‘fitter’ and attract new members, or to be mimicked by other groups. And that was one of the theoretical predictions we had made earlier.”

Fu said the next step is to conduct experiments using human subjects to determine if the results of the computer models are reflected in real-world tests.

“Group identity is very dynamic and flexible in human society,” Fu said. “Our modeling shows that that flexibility is critical to the healthy function of society, because it allows people to ‘vote with their feet’ and move between groups to maximize group , as well as their benefit from it.”

Explore further: Local education politics 'far from dead'

More information: Fu, Nowak, Rand, and Tarnita were joined in this research by co-authors Long Wang at Peking University and Nicholas Christakis at Harvard Medical School. The work was funded by the Harvard Milton Fund, the Harvard Society of Fellows, the John Templeton Foundation, the National Science Foundation, the National Institutes of Health, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and the National Institute on Aging.

Related Stories

The science of selflessness

Apr 16, 2012

In a talk at the Geological Lecture Hall on Thursday, Harvard biologist E.O. Wilson outlined new thinking on how human social behavior evolved, saying that it was competition among groups of humans — ...

Is there a hidden bias against creativity?

Nov 18, 2011

CEOs, teachers, and leaders claim they want creative ideas to solve problems. But creative ideas are rejected all the time. A new study, which will be published in an upcoming issue of Psychological Science, a journal of the ...

People think the 'typical' member of a group looks like them

Sep 02, 2011

(PhysOrg.com) -- What does a typical European face look like according to Europeans? It all depends on which European you ask. Germans think the typical European looks more German; Portuguese people think the typical European ...

How fish swim: Imaging device shows contribution of fins

Apr 22, 2011

There are fish tales and then there are fish tails. And a report from Harvard researchers in the current issue of the journal Biology Letters seems to demonstrate that previous theories about how bony fish mo ...

Recommended for you

Local education politics 'far from dead'

15 hours ago

Teach for America, known for recruiting teachers, is also setting its sights on capturing school board seats across the nation. Surprisingly, however, political candidates from the program aren't just pushing ...

First grade reading suffers in segregated schools

15 hours ago

A groundbreaking study from the Frank Porter Graham Child Development Institute (FPG) has found that African-American students in first grade experience smaller gains in reading when they attend segregated schools—but the ...

Why aren't consumers buying remanufactured products?

17 hours ago

Firms looking to increase market share of remanufactured consumer products will have to overcome a big barrier to do so, according to a recent study from the Penn State Smeal College of Business. Findings from faculty members ...

Expecting to teach enhances learning, recall

17 hours ago

People learn better and recall more when given the impression that they will soon have to teach newly acquired material to someone else, suggests new research from Washington University in St. Louis.

Understanding the economics of human trafficking

Jul 28, 2014

Although Europe is one of the strictest regions in the world when it comes to guaranteeing the respect of human rights, the number of people trafficked to or within the EU still amounts to several hundred ...

User comments : 2

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

HannesAlfven
1 / 5 (1) Jul 09, 2012
The university physics programs could learn a lot from these sociologists.
Skepticus
1 / 5 (1) Jul 10, 2012
This clueless character has been down a hole and pulled it in after himself, and now just emerged. Facts of Monkey Politics and Machinations on this planet: Every action-declaration, resolution, condemnation, protestations, provocation,sanctions, blah blah blah-political, militarily, economical, financial or other wise- of every faction, political party, governments/ country and its allies has always been glaringly obvious example of favoritism of the "home team". Of course it will work in bamboozling the stupid masses. It exemplify the idea: if *almost* everyone is concertedly saying something is rotten (*there has to be some assigned, pretended, feeble voices of dissent within the group to give the agenda its perceived serious weight), then it's must be true, or there must be something smelly about it! It is also imperative to publish a peer-reviewed paper on such stupid no brainer. It's a requirement for an entry in Wikipedia, and further research grants.