为什么人类的亲社会在世界范围内有所不同?进化模型和实验室实验表明,选择合作伙伴的可能性(即离开无利可图的关系并建立新关系的能力)应促进整个人类社会的合作。利用全球偏好调查(n=27,125;27个国家)和世界价值观调查(n=54,728;32个国家),我们通过估计关系移动性之间的关联来检验这一理论,伴侣选择的社会生态衡量标准,以及各种各样的亲社会态度和行为,包括非个人的利他主义,互惠,信任,集体行动和反社会行为的道德判断。与我们预先登记的预测相反,我们发现几乎没有证据表明伴侣选择与不同国家的亲社会有关.在控制了关系流动性和亲社会的共同原因-环境严酷之后,生存方式以及地理和语言上的接近性-我们发现,只有利他主义和对来自另一种宗教的人的信任与关系流动性呈正相关。我们没有发现关系流动性和互惠之间的正相关关系,广义信任,集体行动或道德判断。这些发现挑战了人类合作的进化理论,该理论强调伴侣选择是关键的解释机制,并强调需要将模型和实验推广到全球样本。
Why does human prosociality vary around the world? Evolutionary models and laboratory experiments suggest that possibilities for partner choice (i.e. the ability to leave unprofitable relationships and strike up new ones) should promote cooperation across human societies. Leveraging the Global Preferences Survey (n = 27,125; 27 countries) and the World Values Survey (n = 54,728; 32 countries), we test this theory by estimating the associations between relational mobility, a socioecological measure of partner choice, and a wide variety of prosocial attitudes and behaviours, including impersonal altruism, reciprocity, trust, collective action and moral judgements of antisocial behaviour. Contrary to our pre-registered predictions, we found little evidence that partner choice is related to prosociality across countries. After controlling for shared causes of relational mobility and prosociality - environmental harshness, subsistence style and geographic and linguistic proximity - we found that only altruism and trust in people from another religion are positively related to relational mobility. We did not find positive relationships between relational mobility and reciprocity, generalised trust, collective action or moral judgements. These findings challenge evolutionary theories of human cooperation which emphasise partner choice as a key explanatory mechanism, and highlight the need to generalise models and experiments to global samples.