Working alternately is the result of evolution

Assignment to work is not just a good habit - it is actually a result of evolution, psychologists from the University of Leicester revealed after a recent study.

A study by the University of Leicester Psychology research to explain how rotating work evolved across species. The conclusion is that there is an 'invisible hand' through evolution that directs our behavior in this regard. In addition, the researchers also pointed out that this action can be reproduced on the model using computer algorithms and basic gene rules.

Professor Andrew Colman and Dr. Lindsay Browning conducted the study and will publish the results in Evolutionary Ecology Research in November. This study aims to explain the evolution of alternate work assignment.

Professor Colman said: 'In each group of people, assignments of alternate work are often planned and run with the help of language. For example, people who live in a home often agree to washing dishes after meals or taking them to school in the order of circulation. But following the order in turn is noted to have evolved through many other species - those without language or the ability to come to an agreement after negotiation. They are gibbons, monkeys, birds, and antelopes - the ones in the herd in these species often brush each other. Or are Antarctic penguins - each couple will take turns to the sea to take care of themselves while the other is at home hatching eggs or preparing to give birth. "

'Currently, scientists still do not understand how the turn-around has evolved in non-linguistic species, or as a result of the natural selection process to achieve the individual benefits of each in the species. '

The new study shows that assignment of rotation is a consequence of evolution, and can be reproduced on a model using computer algorithms and basic gene rules. (Photo: iStockphoto / Darren Baker)

The researchers say that the 'retaliatory' phenomenon - which repeats the action the individual had done to him in the past - could explain the synchronous cooperation, but not enough to explain assigned assignments. 'For example, many animals go hunting together in large pairs or flocks, and this is synchronous cooperation. 'The tit for tat' is very effective in starting and maintaining this kind of cooperation. '

'But when cooperation comes with assignments, the instinct for' retaliation 'can only play a sustained role, not start the process. For example, in a pair of penguins, if both go on a feeding trip or incubate for a while, then 'retaliation' is not enough to turn into a habit of assigning to work.

With the use of evolutionary game theory and computer modeling, Professor Colman and Dr. Browning discovered the simple transformation of the 'tit-for-tat' consciousness to explain sequential assignment. How can evolution evolve in animals pursuing personal interests naturally.

The researchers said: 'Sequential work appears after a species has developed at least two different types of genes that act differently in the initial interactions. After that, as soon as a couple casually cooperates, they instinctively start to 'give up the tit'. This binds them to the state of rotating work to benefit both. Without genetic diversity, rotating work cannot develop simply in this way. '

Professor Colman added: ' In our model, individuals are computer programs - they are utterly speechless, operating mechanically and selfishly purely. However, they eventually went to work in order in turn in a perfect coordination. We have published indirect evidence to prove this in 2004; And now we can prove it directly and have a very simple explanation for that. Our findings confirm that cooperation does not always need generosity or careful calculation. At the very least, this kind of cooperation - working in turn order - is also controlled by an 'invisible hand', like Darwin's natural selection theory. '

This study uses a specially developed genetic algorithm and is funded through the Auber Bequest Award of the Scottish National Academy and the Royal Society of Edinburgh.

Refer:

Andrew M. Colman & Lindsay Browning.Evolution of cooperative turn-taking.Evolutionary Ecology Research, 2009;(forthcoming)