It can sound dishonest or malicious to talk about someone behind their back, but it doesn’t have to. New research shows that sharing truthful information can have a positive impact on relationships.
These findings are based upon a mathematical model of gossip which was recently awarded the Nobel Prize in Mathematics. Ig Nobel Prize a satiric award designed to first make people laugh and then make them think – much like gossip itself.
Whispering about people is generally frowned upon. But this clever form of communication may be acceptable. Human interaction is a fundamental element of human interaction. There’s a good chance that gossip is useful, considering how common it seems.
A growing body of research is proving the importance of gossip in social interactions.
It could also be used to assess another person’s reliability. If someone shares false information about a third party for personal benefit, the listener might be able to detect the lies and come to distrust the liar – a form of social punishment.
If someone is honest about a third person, it could increase trust and promote group cooperation.
A team of international researchers used a simplified mathematical model in order to examine when gossip can be honest or dishonest and how that affects everyone.
The model was mainly put together by Paul van Lange from Vrij Universiteit Amsterdam, Szabolcs Számadó from the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, and Junhui Wu from the Chinese Academy of Sciences in Beijing.
They created a triangle out of gossip. The gossiper is at one corner of the triangle, while the recipient is at the other corner. At the top of each triangle, there is the third person being discussed, even though they are not there.
The model was used to examine four different social interactions, using four games that captured potential repercussions from gossiping.
Also, it will be determined if the exchange was profitable for the person who heard it or the person about whom it was.
The researchers tested their hypothesis by modeling gossipers. They tended to spread truths and lies to increase their own reputation without affecting their reputation.
When they shared a goal together, gossipers tend to be open-minded, and their success or failure is often intertwined.
They were more likely than others to tell lies if they had different goals from the recipients and targets of their gossip.
“For example, you might be competing with a colleague for a prized promotion. Only one person can get the job.” explainsLeo Tiokhin, a support author and metascientist from Eindhoven University Technology in the Netherlands, is the author.
“In such situations people are negatively interdependent: one’s success means the other’s failure.” These situations could lead to gossip that is negative or dishonest, as well as gossip that is harmful to co-workers.
Researchers use only theoretical models and they don’t reflect complex social interactions. The gossip recipient is assumed to believe whatever they hear.
The gossiper knew, in addition, if their friends were likely or not to cooperate.
“These assumptions were intended to be tractable and can certainly be modified in future extensions.” Says Tiokhin.
Based on game theory, researchers have found that gossipers can make optimal decisions regarding whether or not to lie depending on the situation.
This idea is supported by several studies. This is illustrated by the following: Some researchAccording to research, gossiping about rivals is more likely than gossiping about them. The gossiper will often falsely portray the actions or intentions of another person even if they are honest.
However, there are other studiesIt has been proven that gossiping about your loved ones is more likely than not to be constructive and can help you build a stronger bond with your interconnected friends.
“[T]The field is still at the beginning stages of understanding the context underpinnings of people’s strategies to share honest gossip or not,” said the authors. Receipt.
“We demonstrate that honesty is determined primarily by the marginal benefit resulting from dishonest or honest gossip.”
The study was published by Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences.
