The motivation to build and maintain a positive personal reputation promotes prosocial behavior. But individuals also identify with their groups, and so it is possible that the desire to maintain or enhance group reputation may have similar effects. Here, we show that 5-year-old children actively invest in the reputation of their group by acting more generously when their group’s reputation is at stake. Children shared significantly more resources with fictitious other children not only when their individual donations were public rather than private but also when their group’s donations (effacing individual donations) were public rather than private. These results provide the first experimental evidence that concern for group reputation can lead to higher levels of prosociality.
BatesonM.CallowL.HolmesJ. R.Redmond RocheM. L.NettleD. (2013). Do images of ‘watching eyes’ induce behaviour that is more pro-social or more normative? A field experiment on littering. PLOS ONE, 8(12), Article e82055.
2.
BaumardN.AndreJ.-B.SperberD. (2013). A mutualistic approach to morality: The evolution of fairness by partner choice. Behavioral & Brain Sciences, 36, 59–122.
3.
BilligM.TajfelH. (1973). Social categorization and similarity in intergroup behaviour. European Journal of Social Psychology, 3, 27–52. doi:10.1002/ejsp.2420030103
4.
BlakeP. R.RandD. G.TingleyD.WarnekenF. (2015). The shadow of the future promotes cooperation in a repeated prisoner’s dilemma for children. Scientific Reports, 5, 14559. doi:10.1038/srep14559
5.
BoydR.RichersonP. J. (1989). The evolution of indirect reciprocity. Social Networks, 11, 213–236. doi:10.1016/0378-8733(89)90003-8)
6.
DixitA. K. (2004). Lawlessness and economics: Alternative modes of governance. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
7.
DobsonA. J. (2002). An introduction to generalized linear models (2nd ed.). Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall/CRC.
8.
DunhamY.BaronA. S.CareyS. (2011). Consequences of “minimal” group affiliations in children. Child Development, 82, 793–811. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2011.01577.x
9.
EngelmannJ. M.HerrmannE.TomaselloM. (2012). Five-year olds, but not chimpanzees, attempt to manage their reputations. PLOS ONE, 7(10), Article e48433. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0048433
10.
EngelmannJ. M.OverH.HerrmannE.TomaselloM. (2013). Young children care more about their reputations with ingroup members and potential reciprocators. Developmental Science, 16, 952–958.
11.
FehrE. (2004). Don’t lose your reputation. Nature, 432, 449–450. doi:10.1038/432449a
12.
FesslerD. M. T. (2007). From appeasement to conformity: Evolutionary and cultural perspectives on shame, competition, and cooperation. In TracyJ. L.RobinsR. W.TangneyJ. P. (Eds.), The self-conscious emotions: Theory and research (pp. 174–193). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
13.
FuG.HeymanG. D.QuianM.GuoT.LeeK. (2015). Young children with a positive reputation to maintain are less likely to cheat. Developmental Science, 19, 275–283.
14.
GintisH.SmithE. A.BowlesS. (2001). Costly signaling and cooperation. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 213, 103–119. doi:10.1006/jtbi.2001.2406
15.
GürerkÖ.IrlenbuschB.RockenbachB. (2006). The competitive advantage of sanctioning institutions. Science, 312, 108–111. doi:10.1126/science.1123633
16.
HenrichJ. (2015). The secret of our success: How culture is driving human evolution, domesticating our species, and making us smarter. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
17.
HenrichJ.EnsmingerJ.McElreathR.BarrA.BarrettC.BolyanatzA., . . . ZikerJ. (2010). Markets, religion, community size, and the evolution of fairness and punishment. Science, 327, 1480–1484. doi:10.1126/science.1182238
18.
JordanJ. J.HoffmanM.BloomP.RandD. G. (2016). Third-party punishment as a costly signal of trustworthiness. Nature, 530, 473–476. doi:10.1038/nature16981
19.
KrasnowM. M.CosmidesL.PedersenE.ToobyJ. (2012). What are punishment and reputation for?PLOS ONE, 7(9), Article e45662. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0045662
20.
LeimgruberK. L.ShawA.SantosL. R.OlsonK. R. (2012). Young children are more generous when others are aware of their actions. PLOS ONE, 7(10), Article e48292. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0048292
21.
MartinA. R.OlsonK. R. (2015). Beyond good and evil: What motivations underlie children’s prosocial behavior?Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10, 159–175.
22.
McCullaghP.NelderJ. A. (2008). Generalized linear models. London, England: Chapman & Hall.
23.
McElreathR.Clutton-BrockT. H.FehrE.FesslerD. M. T.HagenE. H.HammersteinP., . . . WilsonM. I. (2003). The role of cognition and emotion in cooperation. In HammersteinP. (Ed.), Genetic and cultural evolution of cooperation (pp. 125–152). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
24.
MilinskiM. (2016). Reputation, a universal currency for human social interactions. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 371(1687), 20150100. doi:10.1098/rstb.2015.0100
25.
MilinskiM.SemmannD.KrambeckH.-J. (2002). Reputation helps solve the ‘tragedy of the commons.’Nature, 415, 424–426. doi:10.1038/415424a
26.
NettleD.NottK.BatesonM. (2012). ‘Cycle thieves, we are watching you’: Impact of a simple signage intervention against bicycle theft. PLOS ONE, 7(12), Article e51738.
27.
NowakM. A.SigmundK. (1998). Evolution of indirect reciprocity by image scoring. Nature, 393, 573–577.
28.
PanchanathanK.BoydR. (2003). A tale of two defectors: The importance of standing for evolution of indirect reciprocity. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 224, 115–126. doi:10.1016/s0022-5193(03)00154-1
29.
RaihaniN. J.SmithS. (2015). Competitive helping in online giving. Current Biology, 25, 1183–1186.
30.
RandD. G.NowakM. A. (2009). Name and shame: How reputation could save the earth. New Scientist, 204(2734), 28–29. doi:10.1016/S0262-4079(09)62991-2
31.
R Core Team. (2015). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Retrieved from http://www.R-project.org
Sebastián-EnescoC.WarnekenF. (2015). The shadow of the future: 5-year-olds, but not 3-year-olds, adjust their sharing in anticipation of reciprocation. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 129, 40–54. doi:10.1016/j.jecp.2014.08.007
34.
SoeteventA. R. (2005). Anonymity in giving in a natural context—a field experiment in 30 churches. Journal of Public Economics, 89, 2301–2323. doi:10.1016/j.jpubeco.2004.11.002
35.
SterelnyK. (2012). The evolved apprentice: How evolution made humans unique. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
36.
TennieC.FrithU.FrithC. D. (2010). Reputation management in the age of the world-wide web. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 14, 482–488. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2010.07.003
37.
TomaselloM. (2016). A natural history of human morality. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
38.
VenablesW. N.RipleyB. D. (2002). Modern applied statistics with S (4th ed.). New York, NY: Springer.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
