6 found
  1.  28
    Cooperative coordination as a social behavior.Richard Schuster - 2002 - Human Nature 13 (1):47-83.
    Coordinating behavior is widespread in contexts that include courtship, aggression, and cooperation for shared outcomes. The social significance of cooperative coordination (CC) is usually downplayed by learning theorists, evolutionary biologists, and game theorists in favor of an individual behavior → outcome perspective predicated on maximizing payoffs for all participants. To more closely model CC as it occurs under free-ranging conditions, pairs of rats were rewarded for coordinated shuttling within a shared chamber with unrestricted social interaction. Results show that animals learned (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
    Export citation  
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  2.  27
    Altruism is a social behavior.Richard Schuster - 2002 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25 (2):272-274.
    Altruism and cooperation are explained as learned behaviors arising from a pattern of repeated acts whose acquired value outweighs the short-term gains following single acts. But animals and young children, tempted by immediate gains, have difficulty learning behaviors of self-control. An alternative source of reinforcement, shared by animals and humans, arises from social interaction that normally accompanies cooperation and altruism in nature.
    Direct download (4 more)  
    Export citation  
  3.  24
    How useful is an individual perspective for explaining the control of social behavior?Richard Schuster - 2000 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (2):263-264.
    Pavlovian feed-forward mechanisms represent an individual perspective that ignores how repeated interactions between the same individuals lead to social relationships. These can determine social cues, coordinated behaviors, asymmetries between partners, and physiological and emotional states associated with social interaction.
    Direct download (8 more)  
    Export citation  
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  4.  44
    Nice idea, but is it science?Richard Schuster - 2006 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 29 (3):240-241.
    In the target article, human cruelty is linked to intrinsic reinforcement from engaging in the behavior without any recommendations for a research program to validate or test for such reinforcement and its independence from ultimate adaptive outcomes. Suggestions are offered in this commentary for such a program.
    Direct download (5 more)  
    Export citation  
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  5.  22
    Why not chimpanzees, lions, and hyenas too?Richard Schuster - 2005 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (5):716-717.
    Examples are cited of group hunting in chimpanzees, lions, and hyenas consistent with evidence for intentionality, organization, and coordination. These challenge the claim for shared intentionality as uniquely human. Even when rarely performed in this way, the significance of such behaviors should not be minimized, especially if this level of “intelligent” action emerges spontaneously in the wild.
    Direct download (6 more)  
    Export citation  
  6.  30
    Why not go all the way.Richard Schuster - 2003 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26 (2):173-174.
    “Psychology Game Theory” grafts social-process explanations onto classical game theory to explain deviations from instrumental rationality caused by the social properties of cooperation. This leads to confusion between cooperation as a social or individual behavior, and between ultimate and proximate explanations. If game theory models explain the existence of cooperation, different models are needed for understanding the proximate social processes that underlie cooperation in the real world.
    Direct download (2 more)  
    Export citation