Talk:Cooperative pulling paradigm

Cooperative pulling paradigm is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on July 26, 2018.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
May 13, 2018	Featured article candidate	Promoted

Animals Low‑importance

Cooperative pulling paradigm is within the scope of WikiProject Animals, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to animals and zoology. For more information, visit the project page.AnimalsWikipedia:WikiProject AnimalsTemplate:WikiProject Animalsanimal

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Animals To-do:

Here are some Open Tasks :

Copyedit:
Merge: GLAM/ARKive donated texts into articles about endangered species.
Improve: Photoperiodism, Tool use by non-human animals, Omnivore, Animal suicide, Sphaerium beckmani (a species in family Sphaeriidae),
Requests:
- Mammals:
- Invertebrates: Campocraspedon
- Fishes: Zaniolepis frenata
Merge: GLAM/ARKive donated texts into articles about endangered species.
Expand: Junqueira cow, Atka mackerel
Nominate and vote: Science collaboration of the month, Article Improvement Drive, WikiProject Animals Collaboration

American English

I have opted for American English (cooperative, etc.) instead of British (co-operative, etc.) because the first usage of Cooperative pulling paradigm is in American English. (De Waal). Edwininlondon (talk) 21:46, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Troll attack while article is being promoted

Can the article be locked/protected from further changes for 24 hours? Are you reporting this incident to the Feds? If it's Russian, they would want to know. CorkyH (talk) 19:16, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Results mixed and complex?

The lede say "mixed and complex results". However, it then continues to describe that results are *posititive* as in: multiple species appear to cooperate indeed. This major conclusion is missing, leaving the subordinary one to prevail. Sending the message: results are unclear. I suggest (and expect) the positive one should be opening line of that paragraph. DePiep (talk) 22:02, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal: Highlight uniquely human sharing after cooperation

Currently the Introduction and “Humans” section of this article describe how children prefer to cooperate but don’t mention that only humans also share rewards fairly after collaboration — a finding shown in Hamann et al. (2011). I propose adding this short paragraph to the Introduction, immediately before “As for the evolution of cooperation…”:

Unlike other species tested, human children not only coordinate actions to obtain a shared reward but also divide those rewards equitably after collaboration. In a landmark experiment, three‑year‑olds who jointly pulled a board loaded with gummy bears shared them equally in roughly 75–80% of trials—even when one child could easily monopolize the treats—whereas chimpanzees showed no increase in sharing following cooperation compared to control conditions.<ref name="Hamann2011"/>

And in the Humans section, add one sentence at the end to reflect this:

Moreover, Hamann et al. (2011) found that children split collaboratively obtained rewards equally in ~75–80% of trials, a behaviour not observed in chimpanzees and argued to be uniquely human.<ref name="Hamann2011"/>

Both will be cited with the same named reference. Feedback welcome before implementing! Darwipli (talk) 03:40, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]