Signaling theory: is deception useful?

A field of biology that studies the possible evolutionary utility of deception.

Signaling theory, or signaling theory, brings together a set of studies in the field of evolutionary biology.It suggests that the study of the signals exchanged in the communication process between individuals of any species can account for their evolutionary patterns, and can also help us to differentiate when the signals emitted are honest or dishonest.

We will see in this article what signal theory is, what honest and dishonest signals are in the context of evolutionary biology, as well as some of its consequences in studies on human behavior.

Signaling theory: is deception evolutionary?

Studied in the context of Biological and evolutionary theory, deception or lying can acquire an adaptive meaning.. Transferred from there to the study of animal communication, deception is understood as strongly linked to persuasive activity, since it consists mainly in providing false information for the benefit of the sender, even if it means a detriment to the sender (Redondo, 1994).

This has been studied by biology has been studied by biology in different species of animals, including human beings, through the signals they send to the sender (Redondo, 1994).This has been studied by biology in different animal species, including humans, through the signals sent by some individuals to others and the effects they produce.

In this sense, evolutionary theory tells us that the interaction between individuals of the same species (as well as between individuals of different species) is crossed by the constant exchange of different signals. Especially when it is an interaction that involves a certain conflict of interest, the signals exchanged may seem honest, even though they are not.

In the same vein, signaling theory has proposed that the evolution of an individual of any species is marked in an important way by the need to emit and receive signals in an ever more perfected manner, so that this allows it to resist manipulation by other individuals..

Honest signals and dishonest signals: differences and effects

For this theory, the exchange of signals, both honest and dishonest, has an evolutionary character, since when a given signal is emitted, the behavior of the receiver is modified, to the benefit of the one who emits it.

We are dealing with honest signals when the behavior corresponds to the apparent intention. On the other hand, signals are dishonest when the behavior appears to have one intention, but in reality has another, which is also potentially harmful to the recipientand certainly beneficial to the one who emits it.

The development, evolution and fate of the latter, the dishonest signals, can have two possible consequences for the dynamics of a species, according to Redondo (1994). Let us see them below.

1. The dishonest signal becomes extinct

According to signal theory, deceptive signals are especially emitted by those individuals that have an advantage over others. In fact, it suggests that in an animal population where there are predominantly honest signals, and one of the most biologically efficient individuals initiates an honest signal, the latter will spread rapidly, the latter will expand with speed.

But what happens when the receiver has already developed the ability to detect dishonest signals? In evolutionary terms, the individuals receiving the dishonest signals have generated increasingly complex evaluation techniques to be able to detect which signal is honest and which is not. decreases the profit of the issuer of the deceptionand finally causes its extinction.

From the above it can also happen that dishonest signals are eventually replaced by honest signals. At least temporarily, while the probability that they will be used with dishonest intentions increases. An example of this is the threatening displays of seagulls.. Although there is a great variety of such displays, they all seem to have the same function, which means that a set of potentially dishonest signals have become fixed as honest signals.

2. The dishonest signal is fixed

However, another effect can occur in the presence and increase of dishonest signals. This is that the signal becomes permanently fixed in the population, which occurs if all honest signals are extinguished. In this case, the dishonest sign remains no longer as a dishonest sign, for in the absence of sincerity the deception loses its meaning. It remains, then, as a convention that loses connection with the initial reaction of the recipient. loses connection with the initial reaction of the recipient..

An example of the latter is the following: a flock shares an alarm signal that warns of the presence of a predator. This is a sincere signal, which serves to protect the species.

However, if one of the members emits the same signal, but not when a predator approaches, but when it experiences a failure in the competition for food with other members of the same species, this will give it an advantage over its flock and cause the (now deceptive) signal to be transformed and maintained. In fact, several species of birds make false alarm signals to distract others and thus obtain food.

The handicap principle

In the year 1975, the Israeli biologist Amotz Zahavi proposed that the emission of some honest signals involves such a high cost, that only the most biologically dominant individuals can afford to perform them..

In this sense, the existence of some honest signals would be guaranteed by the cost they entail, and the existence of dishonest signals as well. This ultimately represents a disadvantage for the less dominant individuals who want to emit false signals.

In other words, the benefit acquired by the emission of dishonest signals would be reserved only for the most biologically dominant individuals. This principle is known as the handicap principle.

Application in the study of human behavior

Among other things, signal theory has been used to explain some of the patterns of to explain some interaction patterns, as well as the attitudesand attitudes displayed during coexistence between different people.

For example, attempts have been made to understand, evaluate and even predict the authenticity of different intentions, objectives and values generated in interactions between certain groups.

The latter, according to Pentland (2008), occurs from the study of their signaling patterns, which would represent a second communication channel. Although this remains implicit, it helps to explain why decisions or attitudes are made in the margin of the most basic interactions, such as in a job interview or in a first coexistence between strangers.

In other words, it has served to develop hypotheses on how we can know when someone is genuinely interested or attentive during a communicative process.

Bibliographic references:

• Handicap principle (2018). Wikipedia The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved September 4, 2018. Available at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Handicap_principle.
• Pentland, S. (2008). Honest Signals: How They Shape Our World. The MIT Press: USA.
• Redondo, T. (1994). Communication: theory and evolution of signals. In: Carranza, J. (ed.). Ethology: Introduction to Behavioral Science. Publications of the University of Extremadura, Cáceres, Spain, pp. 255-297.
• Grafen, A. and Johnstone, R. (1993). Why we need ESS signalling theory. Philosophical Transactions Of the Royal Society B, 340(1292).