Individualist and Multi-level Perspectives on Selection in Structured Populations

176 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Altruism, Group Selection and Correlated Interaction (2005, methodology): “(See Kerr and Godfrey-Smith [2002] and Okasha [2004a] for a detailed discussion of this analogy.”
Rethinking the Theoretical Foundation of Sociobiology (2007, background): “To pick a second example of pluralism, Kerr and Godfrey-Smith (2002a) outline two equivalent frameworks that they call collective and contextual (similar to Dugatkin and Reeve’s 1994 distinction between multilevel selection and broad-sense individualism).”
The firm as an interactor: firms as vehicles for habits and routines (2004, background): “15 See, for example, Boyd and Richerson (1985), Hodgson (1993), Brandon (1996), Sober and Wilson (1998), Bergstrom (2002, 2003), Kerr and Godfrey-Smith (2002a). behavioural norms and routinised practices, which can augment individual skills and output per person (Argyris and Schön, 1996; Hodgson,…”
Strong Reciprocity and the Roots of Human Morality (2008, background): “…the accounting is done, we must take into account the fact that fitness losses that accrue to individual altruistic acts may be compensated at a higher social level, so that the fitness of the altruism-generating genes are not compromised at the level of the population (Kerr % Godfrey-Smith, 2002).”