Intra- and intergroup conflict are likely to have been recurrent features of human evolutionary history; however, little research has investigated the factors that affect men’s combat alliance decisions. The current study investigated whether features of previous one-on-one combat with an opponent affect men’s interest in allying with that opponent for future group combat. Fifty-eight undergraduate men recruited from a psychology department subject pool participated in a one-on-one laboratory fight simulation. We manipulated fight outcome (between-subjects), perceived fighter health asymmetry (within-subjects), and the presence of a witness (within-subjects) over six sets of five rounds of fighting. Following each set, we asked men how interested they would be in allying with their opponent for future group combat. We found that men were more interested in allying with their opponent for future group combat if their opponent won the fight or if a witness was present, but perceived fighter-health asymmetry did not affect men’s decision to ally with their opponent. Exploratory analyses revealed a two-way interaction between fight outcome and the presence of a witness, such that winners without a witness present expressed less interest in allying with their opponent for future group combat. Our findings suggest that men attend to the benefits of allying with a man who has demonstrated relatively superior fighting ability. Alliance with a previous opponent for group combat may vary with the relationship value of the opponent and the utility of demonstrating cooperativeness to third-party observers. These findings inform our understanding of coalition formation.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Price includes VAT for USA
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
This is the net price. Taxes to be calculated in checkout.
Apicella, C. L., Marlowe, F. W., Fowler, J. H., & Christakis, N. A. (2012). Social networks and cooperation in hunter-gatherers. Nature, 481, 497–501.
Association of Boxing Commissions. (2009). Unified rules of MMA (Unified Rules). Retrieved from http://www.abcboxing.com/unified_mma_rules.pdf
Aureli, F., & van Schaik, C. P. (1991). Post-conflict behaviour in long-tailed macaques (Macaca fascicularis): Coping with the uncertainty. Ethology, 89, 101–114.
Aureli, F., Cords, M., & Van Schaik, C. P. (2002). Conflict resolution following aggression in gregarious animals: A predictive framework. Animal Behaviour, 64, 325–343.
Benenson, J. F., & Wrangham, R. W. (2016). Cross-cultural sex differences in post-conflict affiliation following sports matches. Current Biology, 26, 2208–2212.
Brown, D. E. (1991). Human universals. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Castles, D. L., & Whiten, A. (1998a). Post-conflict behaviour of wild olive baboons. I. Reconciliation, redirection and consolation. Ethology, 104, 126–147.
Castles, D. L., & Whiten, A. (1998b). Post-conflict behaviour of wild olive baboons. II. Stress and self-directed behaviour. Ethology, 104, 148–160.
Chiao, J. Y., Harada, T., Oby, E. R., Li, Z., Parrish, T., & Bridge, D. J. (2009). Neural representations of social status hierarchy in human inferior parietal cortex. Neuropsychologia, 47, 354–363.
Clutton-Brock, T. H., Albon, S. D., & Gibson, R. M. (1979). The logical stag: Adaptive aspects of fighting in red deer (Cervus elaphus L.). Animal Behaviour, 27, 211–225.
Cords, M. (1994). Experimental approaches to the study of primate conflict resolution. In J. J. Roeder, B. Thierry, J. R. Anderson, & N. Herrenschmidt (Eds.), Current primatology, Vol. II: Social development, learning and behaviour (pp. 127–136). Strasbourg: Presses de l’ Universite´ Louis Pasteur.
Daly, M., & Wilson, M. (1988). Homicide. Hawthorne: Aldine de Gruyter.
de Waal, F. B. M. (2000). Primates--a natural heritage of conflict resolution. Science, 289, 586–590.
de Waal, F. B. M., & Aureli, F. (1997). Conflict resolution and distress alleviation in monkeys and apes. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 807, 317–328.
de Waal, F. B. M., & van Roosmalen, A. (1979). Reconciliation and consolation among chimpanzees. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 5, 55–66.
Glowacki, L., Isakov, A., Wrangham, R. W., McDermott, R., Fowler, J. H., & Christakis, N. A. (2016). Formation of raiding parties for intergroup violence is mediated by social network structure. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113, 12114–12119.
Goldstein, J. S. (2001). War and gender: How gender shapes the war system and vice versa. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gould, R. (2003). Collision of wills: How ambiguity about social rank breeds conflict. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Judge, P. G., & Bachmann, K. A. (2013). Witnessing reconciliation reduces arousal of bystanders in a baboon group (Papio hamadryas hamadryas). Animal Behaviour, 85(5), 881–889.
Koski, S. E., Koops, K., & Sterck, E. H. (2007). Reconciliation, relationship quality, and postconflict anxiety: Testing the integrated hypothesis in captive chimpanzees. American Journal of Primatology, 69, 158–172.
Lee, K., & Ashton, M. C. (2004). Psychometric properties of the HEXACO personality inventory. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 39, 329–358.
Lucas, K., & Sherry, J. L. (2004). Sex differences in video game play: A communication-based explanation. Communication Research, 31, 499–523.
Marcus, D. K., Zeigler-Hill, V., Mercer, S., & Norris, A. L. (2014). The psychology of spite and the measurement of spitefulness. Psychological Assessment, 26, 563–574.
McCullough, M. E., Pedersen, E. J., Tabak, B. A., & Carter, E. C. (2014). Conciliatory gestures promote forgiveness and reduce anger in humans. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111, 11211–11216.
McDonald, M. M., Navarrete, C. D., & Van Vugt, M. (2012). Evolution and the psychology of intergroup conflict: The male warrior hypothesis. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 367, 670–679.
Ong, W. J. (2012). Fighting for life: Contest, sexuality, and consciousness. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Payne, R. J. H. (1998). Gradually escalating fights and displays: The cumulative assessment model. Animal Behaviour, 56, 651–662.
Pham, M. N., Barbaro, N., Mogilski, J. K., Shackelford, T. K., & Zeigler-Hill, V. (2017). Post-fight respect signals valuations of opponent’s fighting performance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 43, 407–417.
Pinker, S. (2011). The better angels of our nature: The decline of violence in history and its causes. London: Penguin.
Romero, G. A., Pham, M. N., & Goetz, A. T. (2014). The implicit rules of combat. Human Nature, 25, 496–516.
Schaller, M., & Park, J. H. (2011). The behavioral immune system (and why it matters). Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20, 99–103.
Sell, A. N. (2011). The recalibrational theory and violent anger. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 16, 381–389.
Sell, A., Cosmides, L., Tooby, J., Sznycer, D., von Rueden, C., & Gurven, M. (2009). Human adaptations for the visual assessment of strength and fighting ability from the body and face. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 276, 575–584.
Sell, A., Hone, L. S., & Pound, N. (2012). The importance of physical strength to human males. Human Nature, 23, 30–44.
Snyder, J. K., Kirkpatrick, L. A., & Barrett, H. C. (2008). The dominance dilemma: Do women really prefer dominant mates? Personal Relationships, 15, 425–444.
Van Vugt, M. (2009). Sex differences in intergroup competition, aggression, and warfare: The male warrior hypothesis. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1167, 124–134.
Wang, D. H., & Li, H. (2007). Nonverbal language in cross-cultural communication. Sino-US English Teaching, 4, 66–70.
Wilson, M., & Daly, M. (1985). Competitiveness, risk taking, and violence: The young male syndrome. Ethology and Sociobiology, 6, 59–73.
Wrangham, R. W., & Peterson, D. (1996). Demonic males: Apes and the origins of human violence. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
About this article
Cite this article
Barbaro, N., Mogilski, J.K., Shackelford, T.K. et al. Men’s Interest in Allying with a Previous Combatant for Future Group Combat. Hum Nat 29, 328–336 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12110-018-9315-5
- Valuable relationships
- Post-conflict reconciliation
- Evolutionary psychology