Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-9nbrm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-03-29T03:54:42.499Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Collective action problems in offensive and defensive warfare

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 August 2019

Agner Fog Open the ORCID record for Agner Fog [Opens in a new window]
Agner Fog*
Affiliation:
Department of Information Technology. Technical University of Denmark, 2750 Ballerup, Denmark. agfo@dtu.dkwww.agner.org
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A collective action problem exists not only in offensive warfare, but also in defensive situations. The collective action problem is dealt with in the same way in offensive and defensive warfare: by strong leadership, discipline, rewards and punishments, strong group identification, strict religiosity, and intolerance of deviants. This behavior is explained in terms of evolutionary psychology.

Information

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 42 , 2019 , e122
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Fog, A. (2017) Warlike and peaceful societies: The interaction of genes and culture. Open Book. Available at: https://www.openbookpublishers.com/product/657/.Google Scholar
Gavrilets, S. & Fortunato, L. (2014) A solution to the collective action problem in between-group conflict with within-group inequality. Nature Communications 5:Article No. 3526. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms4526.Google Scholar
Gelfand, M. J., Raver, J. L., Nishii, L., Leslie, L. M., Lun, J., Lim, B. C., Duan, L., Almaliach, A., Ang, S., Arnadottir, J., Aycan, Z., Boehnke, K., Boski, P., Cabecinhas, R., Chan, D., Chhokar, J., D'Amato, A., Ferrer, M., Fischlmayr, I. C., Fischer, R., Fülöp, M., Georgas, J., Kashima, E. S., Kashima, Y., Kim, K., Lempereur, A., Marquez, P., Othman, R., Overlaet, B., Panagiotopoulou, P., Peltzer, K., Perez-Florizno, LR, Ponomarenko, L, Realo, A, Schei, V, Schmitt, M, Smith, P. B., Soomro, N., Szabo, E., Taveesin, N., Toyama, M., Van de Vliert, E., Vohra, N., Ward, C. & Yamaguchi, S. (2011) Differences between tight and loose cultures: A 33-nation study. Science 332(6033):1100–104. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1197754.Google Scholar
Inglehart, R., Moaddel, M. & Tessler, M. (2006) Xenophobia and in-group solidarity in Iraq: A natural experiment on the impact of insecurity. Perspectives on Politics 4(3):495–505. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592706060324.Google Scholar
Minkov, M., Dutt, P., Schachner, M., Morales, O., Sanchez, C., Jandosova, J., Khassenbekov, Y. & Mudd, B. (2017) A revision of Hofstede's individualism-collectivism dimension: A new national index from a 56-country study. Cross Cultural & Strategic Management 24(3):386–404. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/CCSM-11-2016-0197.Google Scholar
Turchin, P. (2007) War and peace and war: The rise and fall of empires. Penguin.Google Scholar