Cultural kin selection - a bibliography

I was planning to publish this bibliography of cultural kin selection as part of my forthcoming "Memes" book - which will have chapters on cultural nepotism and cultural eusociality. However, several issues have resulted in me changing my mind: the URLs are more use on the internet - and a technical bibliography doesn't necessarily seem to be the best use of pages in a popular book.

So: here is a list of materials relating to cultural kin selection. See also my bibliography of the related topic of tag-based cooperation.

• Allison, Paul D. (1992a) The Cultural Evolution of Beneficent Norms.
• Allison, Paul D. (1992b) How Culture Induces Altruistic Behavior.
• Allison, Paul D. (1992c) Cultural relatedness under oblique and horizontal transmission rules.
• Andre, J. B. and Morin, O. (2011) Questioning the cultural evolution of altruism
• Arnold, Eckhart (2008) Explaining Altruism: A Simulation-Based Approach and Its Limits, Volume 1
• Axelrod, R, Hammond, R. A. & Grafen, A. (2004) Altruism via kin-selection strategies that rely on arbitrary tags with which they coevolve.
• Balkin, J. M. (1998) Cultural Software - A Theory of Ideology.
• Boyd, Robert and Richerson, Peter J. (1980) Effect of phenotypic variation on kin selection
• Boyd, Robert and Richerson, Peter J. (1985) Culture and the Evolutionary Process
• Cullen, Ben R. S. (1990) Darwinian views of history: Betzig's vir-ile psychopath versus the cultural virus.
• Cullen, Ben R. S. (1993) Cultural virus theory and the eusocial pottery assemblage.
• Cullen, Ben R. S. (1993) The Darwinian resurgence and the cultural virus critique.
• Cullen, Ben R. S. (1995) On Cultural Group Selection.
• Cullen, Ben R. S. (2000) Contagious Ideas: On Evolution, Culture, Archaeology and Cultural Virus Theory.
• Dawkins, Richard (2009) Lecture on natural selection and evolutionary psychology.
• Efferson, Charles, Rafael Lalive, and Ernst Fehr (2008) The coevolution of cultural groups and ingroup favoritism.
• Evers, John (1998) A justification of societal altruism according to the memetic application of Hamilton's Rule.
• Frank, Steven (1997) The Price equation, Fisher's fundamental theorem, kin selection, and causal analysis..
• Fu, Feng, Nowak, Martin A., Christakis, Nicholas A. and Fowler, James H. (2012) The Evolution of Homophily
• Gardner, Andy (2011) Kin selection under blending inheritance.
• Griffiths, Nathan and Luck, Michael (2010) Changing Neighbours: Improving Tag-Based Cooperation.
• Griffiths, Nathan and Luck, Michael (2010) Norm diversity and emergence in tag-based cooperation.
• Haig, David (2011) Genomic imprinting and the evolutionary psychology of human kinship.
• Hales, David (1997) Memetic Evolution & Suboptimisation.
• Hales, David (1998) Stereotyping, Groups and Cultural Evolution: A Case of "Second Order Emergence".
• Hales, David (2000) Cooperation without Space or Memory: Tags, Groups and the Prisoner's Dilemma.
• Hales, David (2001) Tag Based Cooperation in Artificial Societies.
• Hales, David (2002a) Cooperation and Specialisation without Kin Selection using Tags..
• Hales, David (2002b) Smart Agents Don’t Need Kin – Evolving Specialisation and Cooperation with Tags.
• Hales, David (2004) Tags for All! – Understanding and Engineering Tag Systems.
• Hales, David (2005b) Change Your Tags Fast! – A Necessary Condition for Cooperation?
• Hales, David and Edmonds, B. (2005a) Applying a socially-inspired technique (tags) to improve cooperation in P2P Networks.
• Haun, D. B. M., & Over, H. (2013). Like me: A homophily-based account of human culture. [paywall] In P. J. Richerson, & M. H. Christiansen (Eds.), Cultural Evolution: Society, technology, language, and religion.
• Hawkes, Kristen (1983) Kin Selection and Culture.
• Heylighen, Francis (1992) Selfish Memes and the Evolution of Cooperation.
• Heylighen, Francis (1997) Memetic Scenarios for Evolving Cooperation.
• Holland, John H. (1993) The Effect of Labels (Tags) on Social Interactions.
• Holland, Maximilian Piers (2004) Social Bonding and Nurture Kinship: Compatibility between Cultural and Biological Approaches.
• Holland, Maximilian Piers (2013) Social Bonding and Nurture Kinship: Compatibility between Cultural and Biological Approaches.
• Hull, David (1998) Science as a Process: An Evolutionary Account of the Social and Conceptual Development of Science.
• Hull, David (2000) Taking Memetics Seriously.
• Ihara, Yasuo (2011) Evolution of culture-dependent discriminate sociality: a gene–culture coevolutionary model.
• Jansen, Vincent A. A. and van Baalen, Minus (2005) Altruism through beard chromodynamics.
• Krupp, Daniel Brian, Debruinem, Lisa M. and Barclay, Pat (2008) A cue of kinship promotes cooperation for the public good.
• Pagel, Mark D. (2012) Wired for culture.
• Queller, David C. (1985) Kinship, reciprocity and synergism in the evolution of social behavior.
• Queller, David C. (1992) A General Model for Kin Selection.
• Queller, David C. (2011) Expanded social fitness and Hamilton's rule for kin, kith, and kind.
• Rakita, Gordon, F. M. (2003) Kith and Kin: An Extension of the Inclusive Fitness Model. Presented in Santiago, Chile.
• Rakita, Gordon, F. M. (2007) Kith and kin: An extension of the inclusive fitness model. Presented in Williamsburg, VA.
• Rakita, Gordon, F. M. (2009) Ancestors and elites: emergent complexity and ritual practices in the Casas Grandes polity.
• Read, Dwight (2005) The Evolution of Cultural Kinship: A Non-Darwinian Odyssey.
• Rebers, Susanne (2007) The Evolution of Collective Action.
• Riolo, R.L., Cohen, M.D., Axelrod, R. (2001) Evolution of cooperation without reciprocity.
• Schneider, David M. (1984) A Critique of the Study of Kinship.
• Sigmund, Karl and Nowak, Martin (2001) Tides of tolerance.
• Thomson, Andy (2007) We Few, We Happy Few, We Band of Brothers.
• Van Baalen, Minus and Jansen, Vincent A. A. (2003) Common language or Tower of Babel? On the evolutionary dynamics of signals and their meanings.
• Von Sydow, Momme (2000) Sociobiology, Universal Darwinism and Their Transcendence.
• Von Sydow, Momme (2012) From Darwinian Metaphysics towards Understanding the Evolution of Evolutionary Mechanisms.
• Watson, J. (1983) Tairora culture: Contingency and pragmatism.
• Zimmerman, Matt, McElreath, Richard and Richerson, Peter J. (2012) Evolution of Cooperation.

The real kin selection revolution

Looking at the science news, you might think that the news concerning kin selection has something to do with group selection. However, that affair is a bit of a storm in a teacup, with little real impact on the theory of kin selection.

I think the biggest impact on kin selection concerns the expansion of Darwinism's domain. Kin selection was once only applied to genes. However, with the realisation that it also applies to memes, individually-learned ideas, mimicry and other copied entities some previously-unknown vistas have opened up for the theory.

The impact has been broadly similar to the discovery of alien life forms: new evolutionary dynamics let us know what is contingent on our local historical circumstances.

Kin selection's vs the John Templeton Foundation

Is it true that kin selection's opponents are funded by the Templeton Foundation?

Jerry Coyne alleges this:

Finally, much of the work on group selection has been funded by the John Templeton Foundation, an enormously wealthy organization with an agenda to harmonize faith and science. The idea of group selection, with its spiritual and religious connotations—the process is often used to explain the prevalence of religion and societal harmony—is right up their alley. So the proponents of group selection monopolize not only the megaphones but the funding. In science, money talks.

David Sloane Wilson (here), Jonathan Haight (here) and Martin Nowak (here) have all been linked to Templeton foundation funding. The 2010 attack on kin selection by Nowak, Tarnita and Wilson was funded by the Templeton foundation. They funded SuperCooperators, The Happiness Hypothesis and Darwin's Cathedral.

Nowak's grant was ten million dollars - we are not talking about peanuts here.

The Templeton Foundation funding puts a strange slant on the issue. It is strange to think that some of the skirmishes in the ancient battle between science and religion are now being shrouded in arcane mathematics and published in top science journals.