Human intelligence may have evolved partly because of its value in social cooperation, according to a study led by Jonathan Egeland. The research found that people gained more respect when they used their cognitive abilities to perform a task that could benefit others, rather than simply because they scored highly on a cognitive test.
The findings support what the researchers call the coalitional intelligence hypothesis. This idea proposes that people gain prestige—defined in the study as greater respect and perceived leadership value—when their skills help groups solve collective problems, coordinate actions or obtain useful services.
The team tested the hypothesis with 175 university students in Norway, including 85 complete pairs in a preregistered study. Participants completed a cognitive test, planned a hypothetical food-gathering strategy and explained their reasoning to a partner. The task required them to balance the amount of food gathered against the fatigue caused by the time spent collecting it.
After the exercise, participants rated their partners' intelligence and status. Those who performed better on the food-gathering task generally received higher ratings for respect and leadership. The researchers' statistical analysis indicated that cognitive ability was linked to prestige through performance on the group-oriented task, while the direct relationship between cognitive ability and status was not significant.
In other words, participants appeared to value intelligence when it provided a visible benefit to the group. The researchers also found that participants' estimates of their partners' intelligence broadly matched their actual test scores after only around two minutes of interaction.
The study describes prestige as potentially beneficial to both sides. People who defer to capable individuals may gain access to useful cognitive services, while those who receive deference may gain social status and the associated advantages. Under this model, groups benefit when they recognize competencies that indicate a person's potential value to collective activities.
The researchers caution that the results have limitations. The sample consisted only of university students, so it is unclear whether the findings apply to other populations. In addition, the study measured impressions formed during brief encounters, which may not reflect how status develops in established groups. A single experiment also cannot represent every way an individual might contribute to a group.
The authors suggest that future research should use larger and more culturally diverse samples and observe interactions over longer periods. The study, titled “Coalitional value mediates status allocation based on cognitive ability,” was published in Evolution and Human Behavior.
Sources: Phys.org.