Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 213

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Group Selection, Altruism, and Structured-Deme Models

Nunney, Len·1985·The American Naturalist

Abstract

Group selection is defined as a process by which traits advantageous to the group are favored because of the positive association of individuals exhibiting the traits. In addition, group selection acts to protect this positive association against cheats. This definition, unlike those in current use, incorporates the essential features of the traditional verbal arguments by excluding the effects of individual selection and incorporating the problem of cheating. Kin selection is considered an example of group selection in which the "groups" are associations of relatives and in which special mechanisms, such as individual recognition, maintain the integrity of the associations. The "groups" of group selection are quite different from the trait groups of structured-deme models, so that structured-deme models can be used to demonstrate individual or group selection. By analyzing the models in terms of group neighbors, it has been shown that whenever trait groups are formed at random only individual selection can act. The same results have emerged when there are no groups, only a continuous random array of individuals, and the analysis is in terms of neighborhoods. Individuals exhibiting traits that can evolve under these conditions of neighborhood selection often impart some benefit to their neighbors. Such traits are said to be benevolent. Altruism involves a loss of individual fitness and can evolve only by group selection. The evolution of altruism can be demonstrated in structured-deme models, provided that the altruists exhibit positive association and can occur whether the population forms isolated groups or a continuous array. Structured-deme models are a valuable tool for analyzing local interactions and the resulting neighborhood selection; it is important to note, however, that if a model incorporates isolated trait groups, then within-group comparisons are entirely inappropriate for evaluating the fate of genotypes. Comparing genotypes under conditions of equivalent neighborhoods not only gives a direct indication of relative fitnesses, but also provides the unexpected bonus of making the analysis technically much easier.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1086/284410

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 213

Metadata

Authors
Nunney, L.
Venue
The American Naturalist
Published
1985-08
Volume
126
Issue
2
Pages
212-230
ISSN
  • 0003-0147 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-5323
OpenAlex
W2018945684
Cited by
213
References
2
FWCI
27.89
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Group Selection, Altruism, and Structured-Deme Models. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/284410
The paper
Nunney, L. (1985). Group Selection, Altruism, and Structured-Deme Models. The American Naturalist. https://doi.org/10.1086/284410

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.