The merits of self-handicap: The handicap principle as an explanation of altruism compared to reciprocal altruism

Abstract

This paper reintroduces the Handicap Principle theory as an explanation of altruism. Handicap Principle is a general theory which has been increasingly applied in various disciplines and topics, though strangely it has been missing from both debates and empirical research on altruism in biology. We clarify the logic and principles of HP regarding altruistic behavior based on the costs and benefits to both the donor and the recipient of an altruistic act. We review supportive empirical studies of HP theory. We also compare Handicap Principle theory to Reciprocal Altruism theory and suggest how HP can explain paradigmatic examples of Reciprocal Altruism. Finally, the phenomenon of one-shot altruism is discussed in order to evaluate, and distinguish between, the different explanations of Handicap Principle and Reciprocal Altruism.

Keywords:

• altruism
• handicap principle
• costly signaling
• reciprocal altruism
• indirect-reciprocity
• one-shot altruism

Public Interest Statement

This paper reintroduces an explanation of altruism, a behavior in which one individual (a donor) helps another or others (recipients) at a cost to the donor. This type of behavior has puzzled biologist ever since Darwin. In this paper we explain how altruism can be explained in certain instances as a type of communication of the individual’s qualities to both potential mates for reproduction and potential rivals for maintaining status in the group. This explanation is part of the Handicap Principle theory by Amotz Zahavi. We explain the logic of this theory in relation to altruism and demonstrate how it works in social birds and humans. We also compare the Handicap Principle to Reciprocal Altruism theory to illustrate how the two explain similar behavior very differently.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interest.

Acknowledgements

We thank Avishag and Amotz Zahavi for their support and encouragement. We also thank the anonymous reviewers for their very constructive and helpful comments.

Notes

1. The literature on Group Selection is not discussed in this paper. For further reading see Wynne-Edwards (1962). Wilson (1977), Boyd and Richerson (1990, 1992), Sober and Wilson (2000), Fehr and Gächter (2002), Gintis (2000), Gintis, Smith, and Bowles (2001), Gintis, Bowles, Boyd, and Fehr (2003), Smith (1964, 1976), Wilson and Wilson (2007), Nowak, Tarnita, and Wilson (2010), and Nowak and Allen (2015).

2. The literature on Kin Selection is not discussed in this paper. For further reading see Hamilton (1964), Dawkins (1979), West, Griffin, and Gardner (2007a, 2007b, 2008), Bshary and Bergmüller (2008), Liao, Rong, and Queller (2015), Queller, Rong, and Liao (2015).

Additional information

Funding

Funding. The authors received no direct funding for this research.

Notes on contributors

Doron Shultziner

Doron Shultziner is an associate professor in the Politics & Communications Department at the Hadassah Academic College Jerusalem. He is an interdisciplinary scholar who has published in leading journals such as Biology &Philosophy, Political Analysis, American Journal of Comparative Law, Psychology, Public Policy & Law, and more. He is interested in theories of altruism in biology and the social sciences and in explanations of human behavior and in biology. He received his BA and MA (summa cum laude) from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and his DPhil from the University of Oxford.

Arnon Dattner

Arnon Dattner is an independent scholar and zoologist. He has worked closely with famous zoologist Amotz Zahavi, who first proposed the handicap principle. Arnon produced a film about the Arabian Babblers. He is also an environmentalist entrepreneur who funded CANATURA (Peru) and SOANTI (Nicaragua).