Dynamite News
Here's how superstitions spread in society
A recent analysis tries to explain how superstitious beliefs can become established practices in a society's and become a part of its social norms.
Washington DC: A recent analysis tries to explain how superstitious beliefs can become established practices in a society's and become a part of its social norms.
Ancient Roman leaders once made decisions about important events, such as when to hold elections or where to build new cities, based on the presence or flight patterns of birds. Builders often omit the thirteenth floor from their floor plans, and many pedestrians go well out of their way to avoid walking under a ladder.
While it's widely recognized that superstitions like these are not rational, many persist, guiding the behaviour of large groups of people even today.
In a new analysis driven by game theory, two theoretical biologists devised a model that shows how superstitious beliefs can become established in a society 's social norms. Their work, which appears in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, demonstrates how groups of individuals, each starting with distinct belief systems, can evolve a coordinated set of behaviours that are enforced by a set of consistent social norms.
“Slowly, these actors accumulate superstitions. They may say, 'Ok, well I believe that when I observe this event I should behave this way because another person will behave that way,' and over time if they have success in using that kind of a strategy, the superstitions catch on and can become evolutionarily stable,” Akçay added.
Morsky and Akçay's work is an application of game theory, which attempts to predict how people will interact and make decisions in a social setting. They specifically considered what is known as correlated equilibria, scenarios in which all actors are given correlated signals that dictate their response to any given situation.
"A classic example is a traffic light. If two people are approaching an intersection, one will get a 'stop' signal and one will get a 'go' signal and everybody knows that. It's rational for both parties to obey the light," Akçay.
The signal, in this case, the traffic light, is known as a correlating device, or more evocatively, a "choreographer." But the Penn team wanted to know what would happen if there was no choreographer. If people could pay attention to a variety of other signals that could direct their actions, and their beliefs were transmitted according to the success of their actions, would coordinated behaviours arise? In other words, can evolution act as a "blind choreographer?"
"What if a cyclist is riding toward an intersection, and instead of a traffic light they see a cat. The cat is irrelevant to the intersection, but maybe the person decides that if they see a black cat, that means they should stop, or that maybe that means the approaching cyclist is going to stop," Akçay explained.
Morsky and Akçay showed that the evolutionarily stable norms</a>, those that cannot be replaced by others, have to be consistent, meaning that they successfully coordinate individual behavior even in the absence of an external "choreographer. "(ANI)