---
title: "Why Are We Moral? An LLM-based Agent Simulation Approach"
description: "The authors instead build LLM-driven agents that live in a simulated prehistoric hunter-gatherer world. 48 references."
authors: ["Zhou Ziheng", "Huacong Tang", "Mingjie Bi", "Wanying He", "Fang Sun", "Yizhou Sun", "Ying Nian Wu", "Demetri Terzopoulos", "Yipeng Kang", "Fangwei Zhong"]
year: 2026
venue: "Proceedings of the 64th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers)"
source: "https://aclanthology.org/2026.acl-long.1339/"
doi: "10.18653/v1/2026.acl-long.1339"
licence: "CC BY 4.0 (ACL Anthology)"
licence_url: "https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"
summary_licence: "Elamur Cosmic License"
canonical: "https://research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/ziheng-2026-why-are-we-moral-llm/"
---
[Elamur Research](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/) · [this page in HTML](https://research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/ziheng-2026-why-are-we-moral-llm/)

[home](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/) / [papers](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/) / [2026](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/2026/page/56/) / Why Are We Moral? An LLM-based Agent Simulation Approach to the Study of Moral Evolution

# Why Are We Moral? An LLM-based Agent Simulation Approach to the Study of Moral Evolution

**Authors:** [Zhou Ziheng](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/authors/zhou-ziheng/), Huacong Tang, Mingjie Bi, Wanying He, Fang Sun, [Yizhou Sun](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/authors/yizhou-sun/), [Ying Nian Wu](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/authors/ying-nian-wu/), [Demetri Terzopoulos](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/authors/demetri-terzopoulos/), [Yipeng Kang](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/authors/yipeng-kang/) and [Fangwei Zhong](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/authors/fangwei-zhong/) · **Year:** 2026 · **Venue:** [Proceedings of the 64th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers)](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/venues/acl/) ([ACL 2026](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/venues/acl/2026/)) · **Publisher:** [Association for Computational Linguistics](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/publishers/association-for-computational-linguistics/) · **Licence:** [CC BY 4.0 (ACL Anthology)](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

**Links:** [Publisher's page](https://aclanthology.org/2026.acl-long.1339/) · [PDF](https://aclanthology.org/2026.acl-long.1339.pdf) · [DOI 10.18653/v1/2026.acl-long.1339](https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2026.acl-long.1339) · [OpenAlex](https://openalex.org/W4415254783)

**Citations:** 0 citations (OpenAlex, 2026-10-14)

## Summary
The paper asks why moral behaviour could evolve when natural selection seems to reward self-interest. Classical tools such as evolutionary game theory reduce agents to fixed strategies or payoff tables. As a result, they cannot show how cognition (memory, reasoning, recognising others' dispositions, communicating) affects which moral systems persist. The authors instead build LLM-driven agents that live in a simulated prehistoric hunter-gatherer world. These agents perceive, remember, reflect and decide according to an assigned moral disposition, and the dispositions are based on Singer's "expanding circle" theory. The researchers vary factors that traditional models cannot represent, including how visible an agent's moral type is and how costly communication is. They then track which types survive and reproduce. Over 20 runs in four settings, cooperation and mutual aid were the main drivers of survival. Universal and reciprocal morality produced the most stable outcomes, while selfishness was strongly selected against. The work positions LLM-based simulation as a complement to evolutionary biology and anthropology. It also releases reusable tools for studying social evolution.

## Key points
- The authors release two tools: MoRE, a morality-driven cognitive agent architecture with a reflection step, and Social-Evol, an extensible environment for long-term and scenario-based social simulation.
- Agents are assigned one of four moral types along the expanding circle:
  - self-focused, which reproduce but give no offspring care (modelled on r-selected species);
  - kin-focused;
  - reciprocal group-focused;
  - universal group-focused.
- The experiments covered 20 runs across four settings. Robustness was checked with several LLM backbones, architecture ablations and prompt-sensitivity tests.
- Two mechanisms emerged from agent cognition:
  - **Cost of moral judgment:** assessing others' trustworthiness is time-consuming and error-prone. Unconditional cooperators gain a reputation quickly and avoid this cost.
  - **Self-purging:** selfish agents tend to eliminate one another.
- When communication is prohibitively costly, selfish agents can outcompete moral ones.
- Stated limitations include weak spatial and temporal reasoning in the LLMs, no model of sexual selection, and a restriction to hunter-gatherer conditions.

*Our summary of the paper, in our own words — not its text. The work belongs to its authors; read it at the links above.*

## Institutions

- [University of California, Los Angeles](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/universities/university-of-california-los-angeles/) — University, Los Angeles, United States · 99 works · 56,333 citations
- [Beijing Normal University](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/universities/beijing-normal-university/) — University, Beijing, China · 22 works · 3,177 citations
- [Beijing Institute for General Artificial Intelligence](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/government/beijing-institute-for-general-artificial-intelligence/) — Government body, Beijing, China · 11 works · 633 citations

📚 Shelves (6): [🖥️ Computer Science](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/shelves/computer-science/) · 18,614 works · [🤖 Artificial Intelligence](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/shelves/computer-science/artificial-intelligence/) · 17,965 works · [🤝 Social Sciences](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/shelves/social-sciences/) · 1,954 works · [🤝 Sociology and Political Science](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/shelves/social-sciences/sociology-and-political-science/) · 626 works · [🧠 Neuroscience](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/shelves/neuroscience/) · 186 works · [🧠 Cognitive Neuroscience](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/shelves/neuroscience/cognitive-neuroscience/) · 185 works

## Cite

Cite as: Zhou Ziheng, Huacong Tang, Mingjie Bi, Wanying He, Fang Sun, Yizhou Sun, Ying Nian Wu, Demetri Terzopoulos, Yipeng Kang and Fangwei Zhong. 2026. Why Are We Moral? An LLM-based Agent Simulation Approach to the Study of Moral Evolution. Proceedings of the 64th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers).

The paper itself, not this page. BibTeX from the library's record of the work.

```bibtex
@inproceedings{ziheng2026why,
  title = {{Why Are We Moral? An LLM-based Agent Simulation Approach to the Study of Moral Evolution}},
  author = {Zhou Ziheng, Huacong Tang, Mingjie Bi, Wanying He, Fang Sun, Yizhou Sun, Ying Nian Wu, Demetri Terzopoulos, Yipeng Kang and Fangwei Zhong},
  booktitle = {Proceedings of the 64th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers)},
  year = {2026},
  doi = {10.18653/v1/2026.acl-long.1339},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2026.acl-long.1339}
}
```

- [← previous Whose Pragmatics? Cultural Grounding as a Bottleneck for Stereotype Detection in Egyptian Arabic Social Media](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/assem-2026-whose-pragmatics-cultural-grounding-as/)
- [next → Why Current XAI Is Not Enough for Arabic NLP: A Critical Survey of the Explainability Gap](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/lamsiyah-2026-why-current-xai-enough-arabic/)
- [↑ back to papers of 2026](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/2026/page/56/)

## References

48 references, 1 of them with a card of ours. ↗ leads to the work, «find» searches for one we have no id for yet.

1. Gati Aher, Rosa I Arriaga, and Adam Tauman Kalai. 2023. Using large language models to simulate multiple humans and replicate human subject studies. arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.07872. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Gati+Aher%2C+Rosa+I+Arriaga%2C+and+Adam+Tauman+Kalai%2E+2023%2E+Using+large+language+models+to+simulate+multiple+humans+and+replicate+human+subject+studies%2E+arXiv+preprint+arXiv%3A2306%2E07872%2E)
2. Solomon E Asch. 1946. Forming impressions of personality. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 41(3):258. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Solomon+E+Asch%2E+1946%2E+Forming+impressions+of+personality%2E+The+Journal+of+Abnormal+and+Social+Psychology%2C+41%283%29%3A258%2E)
3. Robert Axelrod and William D Hamilton. 1981. The evolution of cooperation. Science, 211(4489):1390– 1396. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Robert+Axelrod+and+William+D+Hamilton%2E+1981%2E+The+evolution+of+cooperation%2E+Science%2C+211%284489%29%3A1390%E2%80%93+1396%2E)
4. Albert Bandura. 1977. Social learning theory. Prentice Hall. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Albert+Bandura%2E+1977%2E+Social+learning+theory%2E+Prentice+Hall%2E)
5. Paul Bloom. 2013. Just babies: The origins of good and evil. Crown. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Paul+Bloom%2E+2013%2E+Just+babies%3A+The+origins+of+good+and+evil%2E+Crown%2E)
6. Samuel Bowles and Herbert Gintis. 2004. The evolution of strong reciprocity: cooperation in heterogeneous populations. Theoretical population biology, 65(1):17–28. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Samuel+Bowles+and+Herbert+Gintis%2E+2004%2E+The+evolution+of+strong+reciprocity%3A+cooperation+in+heterogeneous+populations%2E+Theoretical+population+biology%2C+65%281%29%3A17%E2%80%9328%2E)
7. Robert Boyd, Peter J Richerson, and Joseph Henrich. 2011. The cultural niche: Why social learning is essential for human adaptation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108(Supplement 2):10918–10925. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Robert+Boyd%2C+Peter+J+Richerson%2C+and+Joseph+Henrich%2E+2011%2E+The+cultural+niche%3A+Why+social+learning+is+essential+for+human+adaptation%2E+Proceedings+of+the+National+Academy+of+Sciences%2C+108%28Supplement+2%29%3A)
8. Oliver Scott Curry, Daniel A Mullins, and Harvey Whitehouse. 2019a. Is it good to cooperate? testing the theory of morality-as-cooperation in 60 societies. Current Anthropology, 60(1):47–69. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Oliver+Scott+Curry%2C+Daniel+A+Mullins%2C+and+Harvey+Whitehouse%2E+2019a%2E+Is+it+good+to+cooperate%3F+testing+the+theory+of+morality%2Das%2Dcooperation+in+60+societies%2E+Current+Anthropology%2C+60%281%29%3A47%E2%80%9369%2E)
9. Oliver Scott Curry, Daniel Austin Mullins, and Harvey Whitehouse. 2019b. Is it good to cooperate? testing the theory of morality-as-cooperation in 60 societies. Current Anthropology, 60(1):47–69. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Oliver+Scott+Curry%2C+Daniel+Austin+Mullins%2C+and+Harvey+Whitehouse%2E+2019b%2E+Is+it+good+to+cooperate%3F+testing+the+theory+of+morality%2Das%2Dcooperation+in+60+societies%2E+Current+Anthropology%2C+60%281%29%3A47%E2%80%9369%2E)
10. Gordon Dai, Weijia Zhang, Jinhan Li, Siqi Yang, Srihas Rao, Arthur Caetano, Misha Sra, and 1 others. 2024. Artificial leviathan: Exploring social evolution of llm agents through the lens of hobbesian social contract theory. arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.14373. — [arXiv:2406.14373](https://arxiv.org/abs/2406.14373) [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Gordon+Dai%2C+Weijia+Zhang%2C+Jinhan+Li%2C+Siqi+Yang%2C+Srihas+Rao%2C+Arthur+Caetano%2C+Misha+Sra%2C+and+1+others%2E+2024%2E+Artificial+leviathan%3A+Exploring+social+evolution+of+llm+agents+through+the+lens+of+hobbesian+)
11. Richard Dawkins. 1976. The selfish gene. Oxford University Press. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Richard+Dawkins%2E+1976%2E+The+selfish+gene%2E+Oxford+University+Press%2E)
12. Morton Deutsch. 1973. The resolution of conflict: Constructive and destructive processes. Yale University Press. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Morton+Deutsch%2E+1973%2E+The+resolution+of+conflict%3A+Constructive+and+destructive+processes%2E+Yale+University+Press%2E)
13. Ernst Fehr and Simon Gächter. 2002. Altruistic punishment in humans. Nature, 415(6868):137–140. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Ernst+Fehr+and+Simon+G%C3%A4chter%2E+2002%2E+Altruistic+punishment+in+humans%2E+Nature%2C+415%286868%29%3A137%E2%80%93140%2E)
14. Hsiao-Tung Fei. 1992. From the Soil, the Foundations of Chinese Society. University of California Press, Berkeley. Translated by Gary G. Hamilton and Wang Zheng. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Hsiao%2DTung+Fei%2E+1992%2E+From+the+Soil%2C+the+Foundations+of+Chinese+Society%2E+University+of+California+Press%2C+Berkeley%2E+Translated+by+Gary+G%2E+Hamilton+and+Wang+Zheng%2E)
15. Alan P Fiske. 1992. The four elementary forms of sociality: framework for a unified theory of social relations. Psychological Review, 99(4):689–723. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Alan+P+Fiske%2E+1992%2E+The+four+elementary+forms+of+sociality%3A+framework+for+a+unified+theory+of+social+relations%2E+Psychological+Review%2C+99%284%29%3A689%E2%80%93723%2E)
16. Carol Gilligan. 1982. In a different voice: Psychological theory and women’s development. Harvard University Press. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Carol+Gilligan%2E+1982%2E+In+a+different+voice%3A+Psychological+theory+and+women%E2%80%99s+development%2E+Harvard+University+Press%2E)
17. Zhenyu Guan, Xiangyu Kong, Fangwei Zhong, and Yizhou Wang. 2024. Richelieu: Self-evolving llm-based agents for ai diplomacy. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 37:123471–123497. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Zhenyu+Guan%2C+Xiangyu+Kong%2C+Fangwei+Zhong%2C+and+Yizhou+Wang%2E+2024%2E+Richelieu%3A+Self%2Devolving+llm%2Dbased+agents+for+ai+diplomacy%2E+Advances+in+Neural+Information+Processing+Systems%2C+37%3A123471%E2%80%93123497%2E)
18. Jonathan Haidt. 2001. The emotional dog and its rational tail: a social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. Psychological review, 108(4):814. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Jonathan+Haidt%2E+2001%2E+The+emotional+dog+and+its+rational+tail%3A+a+social+intuitionist+approach+to+moral+judgment%2E+Psychological+review%2C+108%284%29%3A814%2E)
19. Jonathan Haidt. 2007. The new synthesis in moral psychology. Science, 316(5827):998–1002. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Jonathan+Haidt%2E+2007%2E+The+new+synthesis+in+moral+psychology%2E+Science%2C+316%285827%29%3A998%E2%80%931002%2E)
20. Jonathan Haidt and Craig Joseph. 2007. The moral mind: How 5 sets of innate moral intuitions guide the development of many culture-specific virtues, and perhaps even modules. In Peter Carruthers, Stephen Laurence, and Stephen Stich, editors, The innate mind: Volume 3: Foundations and the future, pag… [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Jonathan+Haidt+and+Craig+Joseph%2E+2007%2E+The+moral+mind%3A+How+5+sets+of+innate+moral+intuitions+guide+the+development+of+many+culture%2Dspecific+virtues%2C+and+perhaps+even+modules%2E+In+Peter+Carruthers%2C+Step)
21. William D Hamilton. 1964. The genetical evolution of social behaviour. i. Journal of theoretical biology, 7(1):1–16. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=William+D+Hamilton%2E+1964%2E+The+genetical+evolution+of+social+behaviour%2E+i%2E+Journal+of+theoretical+biology%2C+7%281%29%3A1%E2%80%9316%2E)
22. J Kiley Hamlin, Karen Wynn, and Paul Bloom. 2011. Young infants prefer prosocial to antisocial others. Cognitive Development, 26(1):30–39. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=J+Kiley+Hamlin%2C+Karen+Wynn%2C+and+Paul+Bloom%2E+2011%2E+Young+infants+prefer+prosocial+to+antisocial+others%2E+Cognitive+Development%2C+26%281%29%3A30%E2%80%9339%2E)
23. Joseph Henrich. 2015. The secret of our success: How culture is driving human evolution, domesticating our species, and making us smarter. Princeton University Press. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Joseph+Henrich%2E+2015%2E+The+secret+of+our+success%3A+How+culture+is+driving+human+evolution%2C+domesticating+our+species%2C+and+making+us+smarter%2E+Princeton+University+Press%2E)
24. Clare Janaki Holden and Ruth Mace. 2003. Spread of cattle led to the loss of matrilineal descent in africa: a coevolutionary analysis. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 270(1532):2425–2433. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Clare+Janaki+Holden+and+Ruth+Mace%2E+2003%2E+Spread+of+cattle+led+to+the+loss+of+matrilineal+descent+in+africa%3A+a+coevolutionary+analysis%2E+Proceedings+of+the+Royal+Society+of+London%2E+Series+B%3A+Biological+)
25. John J Horton. 2023. Large language models as simulated economic agents: What can we learn from homo silicus? arXiv preprint arXiv:2301.07543. — [arXiv:2301.07543](https://arxiv.org/abs/2301.07543) [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=John+J+Horton%2E+2023%2E+Large+language+models+as+simulated+economic+agents%3A+What+can+we+learn+from+homo+silicus%3F+arXiv+preprint+arXiv%3A2301%2E07543%2E+%E2%80%94+%5BarXiv%3A2301%2E07543%5D%28https%3A%2F%2Farxiv%2Eorg%2Fabs%2F2301%2E07543%29)
26. Yizhe Huang, Xingbo Wang, Hao Liu, Fanqi Kong, Aoyang Qin, Min Tang, Xiaoxi Wang, Song-Chun Zhu, Mingjie Bi, Siyuan Qi, and 1 others. 2024. Adasociety: An adaptive environment with social structures for multi-agent decision-making. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 37:35388–35413. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Yizhe+Huang%2C+Xingbo+Wang%2C+Hao+Liu%2C+Fanqi+Kong%2C+Aoyang+Qin%2C+Min+Tang%2C+Xiaoxi+Wang%2C+Song%2DChun+Zhu%2C+Mingjie+Bi%2C+Siyuan+Qi%2C+and+1+others%2E+2024%2E+Adasociety%3A+An+adaptive+environment+with+social+structures+f)
27. Herbert Gintis, Eric Alden Smith, and Samuel Bowles. 2001. Costly signaling and cooperation. Journal of theoretical biology, 213(1):103–119. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Herbert+Gintis%2C+Eric+Alden+Smith%2C+and+Samuel+Bowles%2E+2001%2E+Costly+signaling+and+cooperation%2E+Journal+of+theoretical+biology%2C+213%281%29%3A103%E2%80%93119%2E)
28. Hillard Kaplan, Kim Hill, Jane Lancaster, and A Magdalena Hurtado. 1992. The evolution of life history theory: A bibliometric study of an interdisciplinary research area. Evolutionary Anthropology: Issues, News, and Reviews, 1(2):62–71. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Hillard+Kaplan%2C+Kim+Hill%2C+Jane+Lancaster%2C+and+A+Magdalena+Hurtado%2E+1992%2E+The+evolution+of+life+history+theory%3A+A+bibliometric+study+of+an+interdisciplinary+research+area%2E+Evolutionary+Anthropology%3A+Is)
29. Kurt Gray, Liane Young, and Adam Waytz. 2012. Moral judgment is not a moral science. Psychological Review, 119(3):542–572. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Kurt+Gray%2C+Liane+Young%2C+and+Adam+Waytz%2E+2012%2E+Moral+judgment+is+not+a+moral+science%2E+Psychological+Review%2C+119%283%29%3A542%E2%80%93572%2E)
30. James Konow. 2003. Which is the fairest one of all? a positive analysis of justice theories. Journal of Economic Literature, 41(4):1188–1239. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=James+Konow%2E+2003%2E+Which+is+the+fairest+one+of+all%3F+a+positive+analysis+of+justice+theories%2E+Journal+of+Economic+Literature%2C+41%284%29%3A1188%E2%80%931239%2E)
31. Joshua D Greene. 2013. Moral tribes: Emotion, reason, and the gap between us and them. Penguin. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Joshua+D+Greene%2E+2013%2E+Moral+tribes%3A+Emotion%2C+reason%2C+and+the+gap+between+us+and+them%2E+Penguin%2E)
32. Guohao Li, Hasan Hammoud, Hani Itani, Dmitrii Khizbullin, and Bernard Ghanem. 2023. [Camel: Communicative agents for" mind" exploration of large language model society](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/li-2023-camel-communicative-agents-mind/). Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36:51991–52008.
33. Mart R Gross. 2005. The evolution of parental care. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 80(1):37–45. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Mart+R+Gross%2E+2005%2E+The+evolution+of+parental+care%2E+The+Quarterly+Review+of+Biology%2C+80%281%29%3A37%E2%80%9345%2E)
34. Siobhán M Mattison, Eric Alden Smith, Mary K Shenk, and Ethan E Cochrane. 2011. The evolutionary ecology of despotism. Evolution and Human Behavior, 32(5):334–347. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Siobh%C3%A1n+M+Mattison%2C+Eric+Alden+Smith%2C+Mary+K+Shenk%2C+and+Ethan+E+Cochrane%2E+2011%2E+The+evolutionary+ecology+of+despotism%2E+Evolution+and+Human+Behavior%2C+32%285%29%3A334%E2%80%93347%2E)
35. Martin A Nowak. 2006. Five rules for the evolution of cooperation. Science, 314(5805):1560–1563. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Martin+A+Nowak%2E+2006%2E+Five+rules+for+the+evolution+of+cooperation%2E+Science%2C+314%285805%29%3A1560%E2%80%931563%2E)
36. Michael Tomasello. 2016. A natural history of human morality. Harvard University Press. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Michael+Tomasello%2E+2016%2E+A+natural+history+of+human+morality%2E+Harvard+University+Press%2E)
37. Robert L Trivers. 1971. The evolution of reciprocal altruism. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 46(1):35– 57. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Robert+L+Trivers%2E+1971%2E+The+evolution+of+reciprocal+altruism%2E+The+Quarterly+Review+of+Biology%2C+46%281%29%3A35%E2%80%93+57%2E)
38. Martin A Nowak and Karl Sigmund. 1998. The dynamics of indirect reciprocity. Journal of theoretical biology, 194(4):561–574. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Martin+A+Nowak+and+Karl+Sigmund%2E+1998%2E+The+dynamics+of+indirect+reciprocity%2E+Journal+of+theoretical+biology%2C+194%284%29%3A561%E2%80%93574%2E)
39. Stephen T Trumbo. 2012. Patterns of parental care in invertebrates. In Nick J Royle, Per T Smiseth, and Mathias Kölliker, editors, Evolution of Parental Care, pages 81–100. Oxford University Press, Oxford. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Stephen+T+Trumbo%2E+2012%2E+Patterns+of+parental+care+in+invertebrates%2E+In+Nick+J+Royle%2C+Per+T+Smiseth%2C+and+Mathias+K%C3%B6lliker%2C+editors%2C+Evolution+of+Parental+Care%2C+pages+81%E2%80%93100%2E+Oxford+University+Press%2C+Ox)
40. Martin A Nowak and Karl Sigmund. 2005. Evolution of indirect reciprocity. Nature, 437(7063):1291–1298. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Martin+A+Nowak+and+Karl+Sigmund%2E+2005%2E+Evolution+of+indirect+reciprocity%2E+Nature%2C+437%287063%29%3A1291%E2%80%931298%2E)
41. Elliot Turiel. 1983. The development of social knowledge: Morality and convention. Cambridge University Press. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Elliot+Turiel%2E+1983%2E+The+development+of+social+knowledge%3A+Morality+and+convention%2E+Cambridge+University+Press%2E)
42. Joon Sung Park, Joseph C O’Brien, Carrie J Cai, Meredith Ringel Morris, Percy Liang, and Michael S Bernstein. 2023. Generative agents: Interactive simulacra of human behavior. Proceedings of the 36th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology, pages 1–22. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Joon+Sung+Park%2C+Joseph+C+O%E2%80%99Brien%2C+Carrie+J+Cai%2C+Meredith+Ringel+Morris%2C+Percy+Liang%2C+and+Michael+S+Bernstein%2E+2023%2E+Generative+agents%3A+Interactive+simulacra+of+human+behavior%2E+Proceedings+of+the+36th+)
43. Eric R Pianka. 1970. On r and k selection. The American Naturalist, 104(940):592–597. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Eric+R+Pianka%2E+1970%2E+On+r+and+k+selection%2E+The+American+Naturalist%2C+104%28940%29%3A592%E2%80%93597%2E)
44. Yiding Wang, Yuxuan Chen, Fangwei Zhong, Long Ma, and Yizhou Wang. 2024. Simulating human-like daily activities with desire-driven autonomy. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.06435. — [arXiv:2412.06435](https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.06435) [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Yiding+Wang%2C+Yuxuan+Chen%2C+Fangwei+Zhong%2C+Long+Ma%2C+and+Yizhou+Wang%2E+2024%2E+Simulating+human%2Dlike+daily+activities+with+desire%2Ddriven+autonomy%2E+arXiv+preprint+arXiv%3A2412%2E06435%2E+%E2%80%94+%5BarXiv%3A2412%2E06435%5D%28https)
45. Zhilin Wang, Yu Ying Chiu, and Yu Cheung Chiu. 2023. Humanoid agents: Platform for simulating human-like generative agents. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.05418. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Zhilin+Wang%2C+Yu+Ying+Chiu%2C+and+Yu+Cheung+Chiu%2E+2023%2E+Humanoid+agents%3A+Platform+for+simulating+human%2Dlike+generative+agents%2E+arXiv+preprint+arXiv%3A2310%2E05418%2E)
46. Jinghua Piao, Yuwei Yan, Jun Zhang, Nian Li, Junbo Yan, Xiaochong Lan, Zhihong Lu, Zhiheng Zheng, Jing Yi Wang, Di Zhou, and 1 others. 2025. Agentso-ciety: Large-scale simulation of llm-driven generative agents advances understanding of human behaviors and society. arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.08691. — [arXiv:2502.08691](https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.08691) [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Jinghua+Piao%2C+Yuwei+Yan%2C+Jun+Zhang%2C+Nian+Li%2C+Junbo+Yan%2C+Xiaochong+Lan%2C+Zhihong+Lu%2C+Zhiheng+Zheng%2C+Jing+Yi+Wang%2C+Di+Zhou%2C+and+1+others%2E+2025%2E+Agentso%2Dciety%3A+Large%2Dscale+simulation+of+llm%2Ddriven+generat)
47. Felix Warneken and Michael Tomasello. 2006. Altruistic helping in human infants and young chimpanzees. Science, 311(5765):1301–1303. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Felix+Warneken+and+Michael+Tomasello%2E+2006%2E+Altruistic+helping+in+human+infants+and+young+chimpanzees%2E+Science%2C+311%285765%29%3A1301%E2%80%931303%2E)
48. Tage S Rai and Alan P Fiske. 2011. Moral psychology is relationship regulation: moral motives for unity, hierarchy, equality, and proportionality. Psychological Review, 118(1):57–75. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Tage+S+Rai+and+Alan+P+Fiske%2E+2011%2E+Moral+psychology+is+relationship+regulation%3A+moral+motives+for+unity%2C+hierarchy%2C+equality%2C+and+proportionality%2E+Psychological+Review%2C+118%281%29%3A57%E2%80%9375%2E)

*Updated 2 November 2026*