The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Weak Altruism, Strong Group Selection
Abstract
Throughout its history, the group selection controversy has been dominated by two major themes. The first involves the selection of groups in a metapopulation as a process analogous to the selection of individuals within single groups. The second involves altruistic behaviors that benefit others at the expense of the individual actor. Usually it is assumed that the two themes are fully compatible and that altruistic behaviors are the primary outcome of group selection. In this essay I point out some inconsistencies between the two themes. I also show that, by following the first theme to its natural conclusions, it is reasonable to expect strong group selection to operate in random associations, without any genetic relatedness among group members.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Wilson, D. S. (1975) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.72.1.143 · Cited by 1,259
Self-citation
Cited by
Reintroducing group selection to the human behavioral sciences
Wilson, D. S., & Sober, E. (1994) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x00036104 · Cited by 954
Self-citationCan altruism evolve in purely viscous populations?
Wilson, D. S., Pollock, G. B., & Dugatkin, L. A. (1992) · Evolutionary Ecology · doi:10.1007/bf02270969 · Cited by 379
Self-citationBoomsma, J. J., & Gawne, R. (2018) · Biological Reviews · doi:10.1111/brv.12330 · Cited by 304
Kin Selection versus Sexual Selection: Why the Ends Do Not Meet
Boomsma, J. J. (2007) · Current Biology · doi:10.1016/j.cub.2007.06.033 · Cited by 278
Metadata
- Authors
- Wilson, D. S.
- Venue
- Oikos
- Publisher
- JSTOR
- Published
- 1990-09
- Volume
- 59
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 135
- ISSN
- 0030-1299 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2324069335
- Cited by
- 186
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 9.73
- 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
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.
