合作与互惠的分类学:超越跨学科社会科学帝国主义。

IF 1.1 4区 心理学 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, BIOLOGICAL
Elias L Khalil
{"title":"合作与互惠的分类学:超越跨学科社会科学帝国主义。","authors":"Elias L Khalil","doi":"10.1007/s12124-025-09906-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The literature on cooperation acknowledges different forms of cooperation and their corresponding forms of reciprocity. This paper goes further and shows that most of these different forms are indeed distinct types; hence, the terms \"cooperation\" and \"reciprocity\" are portmanteau. This paper proposes a taxonomy of ten types: i) quid pro quo; ii) intertemporal allocation; iii) altruism; iv) formal obligations (justice); v) informal obligations (repayment of favors); vi) gifts; vii) allegiance; viii) hegemony; ix) grants; and x) philanthropy. Nonetheless, \"beneficence\", defined as the promotion of the good, is common to all ten types. The promotion of the good entails actions that are free from i) opportunism and deception; ii) self-aggrandizement; and iii) malevolence (envy, schadenfreude, etc.). One payoff of the proposed ten-type taxonomy of cooperation/reciprocity is the delineation of five disciplines: anthropology, economics, political science, sociology, and psychology. Each discipline is suitable for the study of one or two types of cooperation/reciprocity. This raises a question: how does each discipline conceive of the other types appropriate for adjacent disciplines? This paper finds that each discipline effectively sculptures the other types after its own preconceived mode of conception (toolkit)-amounting to \"interdisciplinary social science imperialism.\" The proposed ten-type taxonomy promises a transdisciplinary platform that is impartial, i.e., able to help researchers avoid interdisciplinary imperialism. This payoff shows the possibility of unifying the social sciences without interdisciplinary imperialism, i.e., reducing all types of cooperation/reciprocity to one's favored preconceived toolkit.</p>","PeriodicalId":50356,"journal":{"name":"Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science","volume":"59 2","pages":"44"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12021698/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Taxonomy of Cooperation and Reciprocity: Beyond Interdisciplinary Social Science Imperialism.\",\"authors\":\"Elias L Khalil\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s12124-025-09906-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The literature on cooperation acknowledges different forms of cooperation and their corresponding forms of reciprocity. This paper goes further and shows that most of these different forms are indeed distinct types; hence, the terms \\\"cooperation\\\" and \\\"reciprocity\\\" are portmanteau. This paper proposes a taxonomy of ten types: i) quid pro quo; ii) intertemporal allocation; iii) altruism; iv) formal obligations (justice); v) informal obligations (repayment of favors); vi) gifts; vii) allegiance; viii) hegemony; ix) grants; and x) philanthropy. Nonetheless, \\\"beneficence\\\", defined as the promotion of the good, is common to all ten types. The promotion of the good entails actions that are free from i) opportunism and deception; ii) self-aggrandizement; and iii) malevolence (envy, schadenfreude, etc.). One payoff of the proposed ten-type taxonomy of cooperation/reciprocity is the delineation of five disciplines: anthropology, economics, political science, sociology, and psychology. Each discipline is suitable for the study of one or two types of cooperation/reciprocity. This raises a question: how does each discipline conceive of the other types appropriate for adjacent disciplines? This paper finds that each discipline effectively sculptures the other types after its own preconceived mode of conception (toolkit)-amounting to \\\"interdisciplinary social science imperialism.\\\" The proposed ten-type taxonomy promises a transdisciplinary platform that is impartial, i.e., able to help researchers avoid interdisciplinary imperialism. This payoff shows the possibility of unifying the social sciences without interdisciplinary imperialism, i.e., reducing all types of cooperation/reciprocity to one's favored preconceived toolkit.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50356,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science\",\"volume\":\"59 2\",\"pages\":\"44\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12021698/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-025-09906-7\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, BIOLOGICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-025-09906-7","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, BIOLOGICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

关于合作的文献承认不同形式的合作及其相应的互惠形式。本文进一步表明,这些不同的形式中的大多数确实是不同的类型;因此,“合作”和“互惠”这两个词是混用的。本文提出了十种类型的分类法:1)交换条件;Ii)跨期分配;3)利他主义;Iv)形式义务(正义);非正式义务(报答恩惠);(六)礼物;七)忠诚;八世)霸权;(九)补助金;慈善事业。然而,被定义为促进善的“善行”在所有十种类型中都是共同的。促进善需要不受机会主义和欺骗的行动;(二)自我扩张;iii)恶意(嫉妒、幸灾乐祸等)。提出的十种合作/互惠分类法的一个好处是描述了五个学科:人类学、经济学、政治学、社会学和心理学。每个学科适合研究一种或两种类型的合作/互惠。这就提出了一个问题:每个学科如何设想适合相邻学科的其他类型?本文发现,每个学科都按照自己先入为主的概念模式(工具包)有效地塑造了其他类型——相当于“跨学科社会科学帝国主义”。提出的十类分类法承诺提供一个公正的跨学科平台,即能够帮助研究人员避免跨学科帝国主义。这种回报显示了在没有跨学科帝国主义的情况下统一社会科学的可能性,也就是说,将所有类型的合作/互惠减少到一个人喜欢的先入为主的工具包。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Taxonomy of Cooperation and Reciprocity: Beyond Interdisciplinary Social Science Imperialism.

The literature on cooperation acknowledges different forms of cooperation and their corresponding forms of reciprocity. This paper goes further and shows that most of these different forms are indeed distinct types; hence, the terms "cooperation" and "reciprocity" are portmanteau. This paper proposes a taxonomy of ten types: i) quid pro quo; ii) intertemporal allocation; iii) altruism; iv) formal obligations (justice); v) informal obligations (repayment of favors); vi) gifts; vii) allegiance; viii) hegemony; ix) grants; and x) philanthropy. Nonetheless, "beneficence", defined as the promotion of the good, is common to all ten types. The promotion of the good entails actions that are free from i) opportunism and deception; ii) self-aggrandizement; and iii) malevolence (envy, schadenfreude, etc.). One payoff of the proposed ten-type taxonomy of cooperation/reciprocity is the delineation of five disciplines: anthropology, economics, political science, sociology, and psychology. Each discipline is suitable for the study of one or two types of cooperation/reciprocity. This raises a question: how does each discipline conceive of the other types appropriate for adjacent disciplines? This paper finds that each discipline effectively sculptures the other types after its own preconceived mode of conception (toolkit)-amounting to "interdisciplinary social science imperialism." The proposed ten-type taxonomy promises a transdisciplinary platform that is impartial, i.e., able to help researchers avoid interdisciplinary imperialism. This payoff shows the possibility of unifying the social sciences without interdisciplinary imperialism, i.e., reducing all types of cooperation/reciprocity to one's favored preconceived toolkit.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
16.70%
发文量
66
期刊介绍: IPBS: Integrative Psychological & Behavioral Science is an international interdisciplinary journal dedicated to the advancement of basic knowledge in the social and behavioral sciences. IPBS covers such topics as cultural nature of human conduct and its evolutionary history, anthropology, ethology, communication processes between people, and within-- as well as between-- societies. A special focus will be given to integration of perspectives of the social and biological sciences through theoretical models of epigenesis. It contains articles pertaining to theoretical integration of ideas, epistemology of social and biological sciences, and original empirical research articles of general scientific value. History of the social sciences is covered by IPBS in cases relevant for further development of theoretical perspectives and empirical elaborations within the social and biological sciences. IPBS has the goal of integrating knowledge from different areas into a new synthesis of universal social science—overcoming the post-modernist fragmentation of ideas of recent decades.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信