Talking about someone behind your back may sound mean or dishonest, but it doesn’t have to be. If the information being shared is truthful, it can actually have a positive impact on your relationships with others, according to new research.
The findings are based on the recent Ig Nobel Prize-winning mathematical model of gossip.
While whispering about other people is often frowned upon, this insidious form of communication is also essential for human interaction. Given how widespread the gossip seems to be, it’s likely to help in some way.
In fact, a growing body of research demonstrates some of the important social functions of gossip.
For example, it may be a good way to judge someone’s trustworthiness. When someone shares false information about a third party for personal gain, listeners can detect the lie and become distrustful of the liar. This is a kind of social punishment.
Alternatively, if someone shares truthful information about a third party, trust between individuals may improve, thereby promoting and sustaining group cooperation and teamwork.
Using a simplified mathematical model, an international team of researchers determined when gossip was likely to be honest or dishonest and how those scenarios would ultimately play out for all parties involved. I tried to investigate the
This model was primarily put together by Paul van Lange at VU University Amsterdam, Szabolcs Számadó at the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, and Junhui Wu at the Chinese Academy of Sciences in Beijing.
Together, they simulated gossip as triangles. The bottom of his one corner in the triangle is the gossiper, the other he is the receiver in the bottom of one corner, and the top of the triangle is the third party being talked about while he is not there.
We then used this model to investigate four different social interactions using four games that captured the influence of gossip.
In other words, whether the exchange would be beneficial to those who heard the gossip or anyone about it, or whether it would be costly for either or both.
Using modeling, researchers tested the hypothesis. Gossipers choose to spread honest truths or falsehoods to maximize their own gain without sacrificing their reputation, all the while with two other people involved. We compared the relationship between
In general, gossipers have shared goals with two other parties and have decided to be honest when their successes (or failures) are intertwined.
However, if their goals did not match the recipient or target of the gossip, they were much more likely to lie.
“For example, you might be competing with a colleague for a valuable promotion that only one of you can get,” says co-author and metascientist at Eindhoven University of Technology in the Netherlands. Leo Tiokhin explains.
“In such situations, people are negatively interdependent. The failure of one means the success of others. It is expected to lead to honest gossip when the content is already negative.”
The models used by researchers are only theoretical and rely on several assumptions and thus do not reflect the complexity of social interactions. For example, gossip recipients are always assumed to believe what they hear.
In addition, gossipers always knew whether those around them would cooperate.
“These assumptions were made for ease of use and may certainly be revised in future extensions of our work,” says Tiokhin.
Researchers have used game theory to find evidence that gossipers can make optimal decisions about whether or not to lie, depending on the situation and how it suits them. bottom.
Several studies support this idea. For example, some studies suggest that gossiping about rivals is likely to be dishonest. Gossipers tend to misrepresent the actions and intentions of others when in fact they are well-intentioned.
Meanwhile, other studies have found that gossiping about loved ones is more likely to be positive and may bring interconnected groups closer together.
“[T]The field is still in the early stages of understanding the situational underpinnings of individuals’ strategies for sharing honest or dishonest gossip,” the authors admit.
“We show that honesty is determined by the marginal costs/benefits that result from honest or dishonest gossip.”
This research Royal Society B Philosophical Transactions in the Biological Sciences.