Signal Theory: Is Deception Helpful?

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

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

• Related article: "Can you spot a liar? The 8 types of lies"

Signal 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 of providing false information for the benefit of the issuer, even if it means detriment to the issuer (Round, 1994).

The above It has been studied by biology in different species of animals, including humans, through the signals that some individuals send to others and the effects that these 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 signs. Especially when it comes to an interaction that involves a certain conflict of interest, the signals exchanged can seem honest, even if they are not.

In this same sense, the signal theory has proposed that the evolution of an individual of any species is marked in an important way due to the need to emit and receive signals in an increasingly perfect way, so that this allows resistance to 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 that by issuing a certain signal, the behavior of the receiver is modified, to the benefit of the person who emits.

These are honest signals when the behavior corresponds to the apparent intent. On the other hand, these are dishonest signals when the behavior appears to have one intention, but actually has another, which is also potentially harmful to the recipient, and surely beneficial for whoever issues it.

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

1. The rogue signal is extinguished

According to signal theory, deception signals are especially emitted by those individuals who 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 fit individuals initiates an honest signal, the latter will expand rapidly.

But what happens when the receiver has already developed the ability to detect rogue signals? In evolutionary terms, the individuals receiving the rogue signals generated techniques of increasingly complex evaluation, in order to detect which signal is honest and which is not, what gradually decreases the benefit of the deceiver, and finally causes its extinction.

From the above it can also happen that dishonest signals are eventually replaced by honest signals. At least temporarily, while increasing the likelihood that they will be used for dishonest purposes. An example of this is the threat displays made by seagulls.. Although there is a wide variety of such exhibits, they all seem to have the same function, which means that a set of potentially rogue signals have been set as signals honest.

2. The rogue signal is fixed

However, another effect can occur in the presence and increase of rogue signals. This is where the signal becomes permanently fixed in the population, which happens if all honest signals die out. In this case, the dishonest sign no longer remains a dishonest sign, because in the absence of sincerity the deception loses meaning. It remains, then, as a convention that 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. It is a sincere sign, which serves to protect the species.

However, if any of the members emits that same signal, but not when a predator approaches, but when experiencing a failure in the competition for feed with other members of the same species, this will give you an advantage over your flock and cause the signal (now deceptive) to transform and become keep up. In fact, several species of birds make false alarm signals to distract others and thus get food.

• You may be interested in: "What is Ethology and what is its object of study?"

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 less dominant individuals. who want to send false signals.

Put another way, the benefit gained from dishonest signaling would be reserved only for the most biologically dominant individuals. This principle is known as the handicap principle (which in English can be translated as "disadvantage").

Application in the study of human behavior

Among other things, signal theory has been used to explain some patterns of interaction, as well as the attitudes displayed during the 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 the 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 makes it possible to explain why decisions or attitudes are made outside of the more basic interactions, such as in a job interview or in a first meeting between people unknown.

In other words, it has served to develop hypotheses about 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 in 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, pp. 255-297.
• Grafen, A. and Johnston, R. (1993). Why we need ESS signaling theory. Philosophical Transactions Of the Royal Society B, 340(1292).