251 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22289317)
1. The social structure of cooperation and punishment.
Gintis H; Fehr E
Behav Brain Sci; 2012 Feb; 35(1):28-9. PubMed ID: 22289317
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Lab support for strong reciprocity is weak: punishing for reputation rather than cooperation.
Shaw A; Santos L
Behav Brain Sci; 2012 Feb; 35(1):39. PubMed ID: 22289329
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Strong reciprocity is real, but there is no evidence that uncoordinated costly punishment sustains cooperation in the wild.
Guala F
Behav Brain Sci; 2012 Feb; 35(1):45-59. PubMed ID: 22393582
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Reciprocity and uncertainty.
Bereby-Meyer Y
Behav Brain Sci; 2012 Feb; 35(1):18-9. PubMed ID: 22289307
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Reciprocity: weak or strong? What punishment experiments do (and do not) demonstrate.
Guala F
Behav Brain Sci; 2012 Feb; 35(1):1-15. PubMed ID: 22289303
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Indirect reciprocity provides only a narrow margin of efficiency for costly punishment.
Ohtsuki H; Iwasa Y; Nowak MA
Nature; 2009 Jan; 457(7225):79-82. PubMed ID: 19122640
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Weak reciprocity alone cannot explain peer punishment.
Casari M
Behav Brain Sci; 2012 Feb; 35(1):21-2. PubMed ID: 22289310
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Direct reciprocity with costly punishment: generous tit-for-tat prevails.
Rand DG; Ohtsuki H; Nowak MA
J Theor Biol; 2009 Jan; 256(1):45-57. PubMed ID: 18938180
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Proximate and ultimate causes of punishment and strong reciprocity.
Barclay P
Behav Brain Sci; 2012 Feb; 35(1):16-7. PubMed ID: 22289305
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. The punishment that sustains cooperation is often coordinated and costly.
Bowles S; Boyd R; Mathew S; Richerson PJ
Behav Brain Sci; 2012 Feb; 35(1):20-1. PubMed ID: 22289309
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The strategic logic of costly punishment necessitates natural field experiments, and at least one such experiment exists.
Johnson T
Behav Brain Sci; 2012 Feb; 35(1):31-2. PubMed ID: 22289321
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Blood, sex, personality, power, and altruism: factors influencing the validity of strong reciprocity.
Ferguson E; Corr P
Behav Brain Sci; 2012 Feb; 35(1):25-6. PubMed ID: 22289315
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The restorative logic of punishment: another argument in favor of weak selection.
Baumard N
Behav Brain Sci; 2012 Feb; 35(1):17-8. PubMed ID: 22289306
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Towards a unified theory of reciprocity.
Rosas A
Behav Brain Sci; 2012 Feb; 35(1):36-7. PubMed ID: 22289326
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Culture: the missing piece in theories of weak and strong reciprocity.
Read D
Behav Brain Sci; 2012 Feb; 35(1):35-6. PubMed ID: 22289325
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Perspectives from ethnography on weak and strong reciprocity.
Wiessner P
Behav Brain Sci; 2012 Feb; 35(1):44-5. PubMed ID: 22289335
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Is strong reciprocity really strong in the lab, let alone in the real world?
Güney Ş; Newell BR
Behav Brain Sci; 2012 Feb; 35(1):29. PubMed ID: 22289318
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. In medio stat virtus: theoretical and methodological extremes regarding reciprocity will not explain complex social behaviors.
Civai C; Langus A
Behav Brain Sci; 2012 Feb; 35(1):22-3. PubMed ID: 22289311
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Punishing for your own good: the case of reputation-based cooperation.
Tennie C
Behav Brain Sci; 2012 Feb; 35(1):40-1. PubMed ID: 22289331
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. [A test of the strong reciprocity model: relationship between cooperation and punishment].
Li Y; Yamagishi T
Shinrigaku Kenkyu; 2014 Apr; 85(1):100-5. PubMed ID: 24804436
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
