Journal article

Henrich, J., S. J. Heine, and A. Norenzayan. “Beyond WEIRD: Towards a Broad-based Behavioral Science.” Behavioral and Brain Sciences 33, no. 2-3 (2010): 111-135. PDF
Henrich, Joseph, and Natalie Henrich. “The evolution of cultural adaptations: Fijian food taboos protect against dangerous marine toxins.” Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 277, no. 1701 (2010): 3715-3724. PDF Supplement
Atran, S., and J. Henrich. “The Evolution of Religion: How Cognitive By-Products, Adaptive Learning Heuristics, Ritual Displays, and Group Competition Generate Deep Commitments to Prosocial Religions.” Biological Theory 5, no. 1 (2010): 1-13. PDF
Foulsham, Thomas, Joey Cheng, Jessica Tracy, Joseph Henrich, and Alan Kingstone. “Gaze Allocation in a Dynamic Social Situation of Social Status and Speaking.” Cognition 117, no. 3 (2010): 319-331. PDF
Richerson, P. J., R. Boyd, and J. Henrich. “Gene-culture coevolution in the age of genomics.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 107 (2010): 8985-8992.Abstract

The use of socially learned information (culture) is central to human adaptations. We investigate the hypothesis that the process of cultural evolution has played an active, leading role in the evolution of genes. Culture normally evolves more rapidly than genes, creating novel environments that expose genes to new selective pressures. Many human genes that have been shown to be under recent or current selection are changing as a result of new environments created by cultural innovations. Some changed in response to the development of agricultural subsistence systems in the Early and Middle Holocene. Alleles coding for adaptations to diets rich in plant starch (e.g., amylase copy number) and to epidemic diseases evolved as human populations expanded (e.g., sickle cell and deficiency alleles that provide protection against malaria). Large-scale scans using patterns of linkage disequilibrium to detect recent selection suggest that many more genes evolved in response to agriculture. Genetic change in response to the novel social environment of contemporary modern societies is also likely to be occurring. The functional effects of most of the alleles under selection during the last 10,000 years are currently unknown. Also unknown is the role of paleoenvironmental change in regulating the tempo of hominin evolution. Although the full extent of culture-driven gene-culture coevolution is thus far unknown for the deeper history of the human lineage, theory and some evidence suggest that such effects were profound. Genomic methods promise to have a major impact on our understanding of gene-culture coevolution over the span of hominin evolutionary history.

Henrich, J., J. Ensminger, R. McElreath, A. Barr, C. Barrett, A. Bolyanatz, J. C. Cardenas, et al.Markets, religion, community size and the evolution of fairness and punishment.” Science 327, no. 5972 (2010): 1480-1484. Audio File PDF Supplement Science Perspective by Karla Hoff
Henrich, J., S. J. Heine, and A. Norenzayan. “Most people are not WEIRD.” Nature 466, no. 7302 (2010): 29-29. PDF
Cheng, Joey T, Jessica L Tracy, and Joseph Henrich. “Pride, personality, and the evolutionary foundations of human social status.” Evolution and Human Behavior 31, no. 5 (2010): 334-347. PDF
Henrich, Joseph, Steven J Heine, and Ara Norenzayan. “The weirdest people in the world?Behavioral and Brain Sciences 33, no. 2-3 (2010): 61-83. Audio File PDF Coverage in Science
Gervais, W., and J. Henrich. “The Zeus Problem:Why Representational Content Biases Cannot Explain Faith in Gods.” Journal of Cognition and Culture 10, no. 3-4 (2010): 383-389. PDF
Brosnan, S. F., J. B. Silk, J. Henrich, M. C. Mareno, S. P. Lambeth, and S. J. Schapiro. “Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) do not develop contingent reciprocity in an experimental task.” Animal Cognition 12, no. 4 (2009): 587-597.Abstract

Chimpanzees provide help to unrelated individuals in a broad range of situations. The pattern of helping within pairs suggests that contingent reciprocity may have been an important mechanism in the evolution of altruism in chimpanzees. However, correlational analyses of the cumulative pattern of interactions over time do not demonstrate that helping is contingent upon previous acts of altruism, as required by the theory of reciprocal altruism. Experimental studies provide a controlled approach to examine the importance of contingency in helping interactions. In this study, we evaluated whether chimpanzees would be more likely to provide food to a social partner from their home group if their partner had previously provided food for them. The chimpanzees manipulated a barpull apparatus in which actors could deliver rewards either to themselves and their partners or only to themselves. Our findings indicate that the chimpanzees' responses were not consistently influenced by the behavior of their partners in previous rounds. Only one of the 11 dyads that we tested demonstrated positive reciprocity. We conclude that contingent reciprocity does not spontaneously arise in experimental settings, despite the fact that patterns of behavior in the field indicate that individuals cooperate preferentially with reciprocating partners.

O'Gorman, R., J. Henrich, and M. Van Vugt. “Constraining free riding in public goods games: designated solitary punishers can sustain human cooperation.” Proceedings of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences 276, no. 1655 (2009): 323-329.Abstract

Much of human cooperation remains an evolutionary riddle. Unlike other animals, people frequently cooperate with non-relatives in large groups. Evolutionary models of large-scale cooperation require not just incentives for cooperation, but also a credible disincentive for free riding. Various theoretical solutions have been proposed and experimentally explored, including reputation monitoring and diffuse punishment. Here, we empirically examine an alternative theoretical proposal: responsibility for punishment can be borne by one specific individual. This experiment shows that allowing a single individual to punish increases cooperation to the same level as allowing each group member to punish and results in greater group profits. These results suggest a potential key function of leadership in human groups and provides further evidence supporting that humans will readily and knowingly behave altruistically.

Henrich, Joseph. “The evolution of costly displays, cooperation and religion: Credibility enhancing displays and their implications for cultural evolution.” Evolution and Human Behavior 30, no. 4 (2009): 244-260. PDF
Vonk, J., S. F. Brosnan, J. B. Silk, J. Henrich, A. S. Richardson, S. P. Lambeth, S. J. Schapiro, and D. J. Povinelli. “Chimpanzees do not take advantage of very low cost opportunities to deliver food to unrelated group members.” Animal Behaviour 75, no. 5 (2008): 1757-1770.Abstract

We conducted experiments on two populations of chimpanzees, Pan troglodytes, to determine whether they would take advantage of opportunities to provide food rewards to familiar group members at little cost to themselves. In both of the experiments described here, chimpanzees were able to deliver identical rewards to themselves and to other members of their social groups. We compared the chimpanzees' behaviour when they were paired with another chimpanzee and when they were alone. If chimpanzees are motivated to provide benefits to others, they are expected to consistently deliver rewards to others and to distinguish between the partner-present and partner-absent conditions. Results from both experiments indicate that our subjects were largely indifferent to the benefits they could provide to others. They were less likely to provide rewards to potential recipients as the experiment progressed, and all but one of the 18 subjects were as likely to deliver rewards to an empty enclosure as to an enclosure housing another chimpanzee. These results, in conjunction with similar results obtained in previous experiments, suggest that chimpanzees are not motivated by prosocial sentiments to provide food rewards to other group members. The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Henrich, Joseph, and Robert Boyd. “Division of labor, economic specialization, and the evolution of social stratification.” Current Anthropology 49, no. 4 (2008): 715-724. PDF
Five misunderstandings about cultural evolution
Henrich, Joseph, Robert Boyd, and Peter J Richerson. “Five misunderstandings about cultural evolution.” Human Nature 19, no. 2 (2008): 119-137. PDF
Marlowe, F., J. C. Berbesque, A. Barr, C. Barrett, A. Bolyanatz, J. C. Cardenas, J. Ensminger, et al.More ‘altruistic’ punishment in larger societies.” Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 275, no. 1634 (2008): 587-590.Abstract

If individuals will cooperate with cooperators, and punish non-cooperators even at a cost to themselves, then this strong reciprocity could minimize the cheating that undermines cooperation. Based upon numerous economic experiments, some have proposed that human cooperation is explained by strong reciprocity and norm enforcement. Second-party punishment is when you punish someone who defected on you; third-party punishment is when you punish someone who defected on someone else. Third-party punishment is an effective way to enforce the norms of strong reciprocity and promote cooperation. Here we present new results that expand on a previous report from a large cross-cultural project. This project has already shown that there is considerable cross-cultural variation in punishment and cooperation. Here we test the hypothesis that population size (and complexity) predicts the level of third-party punishment. Our results show that people in larger, more complex societies engage in significantly more third-party punishment than people in small-scale societies.

Gintis, H., J. Henrich, S. Bowles, R. Boyd, and E. Fehr. “Strong reciprocity and the roots of human morality.” Social Justice Research 21, no. 2 (2008): 241-253.Abstract

Human morality is a key evolutionary adaptation on which human social behavior has been based since the Pleistocene era. Ethical behavior is constitutive of human nature, we argue, and human morality is as important an adaptation as human cognition and speech. Ethical behavior, we assert, need not be a means toward personal gain. Because of our nature as moral beings, humans take pleasure in acting ethically and are pained when acting unethically. From an evolutionary viewpoint, we argue that ethical behavior was fitness-enhancing in the years marking the emergence of Homo sapiens because human groups with many altruists fared better than groups of selfish individuals, and the fitness losses sustained by altruists were more than compensated by the superior performance of the groups in which they congregated.

Henrich, J.Cooperation, Punishment, and the Evolution of Human Institutions.” Science 312, no. 5770 (2006): 60-61. PDF
Henrich, J., R. McElreath, J. Ensminger, A. Barr, C. Barrett, A. Bolyanatz, J. C. Cardenas, et al.Costly Punishment Across Human Societies.” Science 312, no. 5781 (2006): 1767-1770. PDF Supplement News & Views in Science