Theories of laughter
Theories of laughter
Laughter seems to be a complex social behavior, certainly it has intrigued researchers from various fields, including psychology, anthropology, and evolutionary biology. Several theories attempt to explain its origins and functions, with each theory focusing on different aspects of laughter' s role in human evolution. Here are some of the leading theories :
1. Social Bonding Theory
1. Social Bonding Theory
Social binding theory was proposed by Robin Dunbar and others , and the key Idea is that laughter evolved as a mechanism to strengthen social bonds within groups, similar to grooming in primates . In this view, laughter acts as a tool for maintaining large social networks and building trust and cooperation. Shared laughter fosters group cohesion, making it easier to establish alliances and cooperation, which would have been crucial for survival in early human societies . Laughter is believed to have helped early humans manage increasingly complex social structures by promoting bonding and reducing conflict. However, a good deal of laughter is at the misfortune of others, which may be hard to reconcile with this theory or is a distinct type of laughter than the one contemplated.
2. Incongruity Theory
2. Incongruity Theory
Immanuel Kant, Arthur Schopenhauer, and others . suggest that laughter arises from the recognition of incongruity—when there is a mismatch between expectations and reality. In humor, for instance, the punchline often subverts expectations, creating an incongruity that triggers laughter. This theory is less about social interaction and more focused on cognitive aspects of humor and laughter . Incongruity detection may have played a role in developing problem-solving and adaptability in human cognition . Laughter could signal the brain' s recognition of a non-threatening anomaly, promoting social learning. I will use this idea in a very specific context - that of competing for the attentions of a potential mate.
3. Superiority Theory
3. Superiority Theory
Thomas Hobbes suggested that laughter originates from feelings of superiority over others. According to Hobbes, people laugh when they witness the misfortune or shortcomings of others, making them feel superior by comparison . This theory has been adapted in various ways to explain why humans enjoy slapstick comedy or schadenfreude (pleasure derived from others' misfortune) . This theory suggests that laughter may have functioned as a dominance signal in early human societies . By laughing at others' failures or mistakes, individuals could assert their social rank or superiority, reducing rivals' status. In fact, this is the idea demonstrated herein - providing an explicit evolutionary argument.
4. Relief Theory
4. Relief Theory
Sigmund Freud and Herbert Spencer suggest that laughter serves as a release of built - up nervous energy or tension . Freud saw humor as a way of releasing pent - up psychological stress in a socially acceptable way . Laughter can provide emotional relief, allowing individuals to express tension without conflict. In this view, laughter evolved as a way to defuse stressful or potentially threatening situations, helping groups to maintain peace and reducing the likelihood of physical conflict. The theory has no explanation for why laughter may do this.
5. Play and Game Theory
5. Play and Game Theory
Jaak Panksepp and others noted that laughter is closely tied to play behavior, particularly in mammals . It signals that actions are non - threatening and playful, not meant to cause harm . Laughter during play, especially in young animals (including humans), helps develop social skills, empathy, and cooperation . Play is crucial for learning social rules, communication, and survival skills . Laughter acts as a signal of safety and social engagement, encouraging bonding and cooperation without the risk of aggression. Again, there is no explanation for why laughter might do this.
The Reverse Prowess Signaling Hypothesis
The Reverse Prowess Signaling Hypothesis
The theory here suggests that one form of laughter evolved as a signaling mechanism in competitive mating environments. Specifically, males “laugh” at other males’ failures to impress, to highlight those failures to females, diminishing the rival’s perceived fitness and thereby increasing their own standing. This theory views laughter not simply as a social bonding tool, but as an evolutionary strategy tied to sexual selection and competition. It is quite likely this form of laughter evolved after the use of noise to alert kin to predators or other danger.
In all that follows I have decided to refer to those attempting to “impress” mates as “Males” and those observing and judging these attempts as “Females.”
In all that follows I have decided to refer to those attempting to “impress” mates as “Males” and those observing and judging these attempts as “Females.”
Laughter as a Competitive Signal
Laughter as a Competitive Signal
In the simulation, laughter is triggered when males observe another male attempting and failing a feat (of course, it could be nay action on the part of a rival that is correlated with lower prowess). This laughter serves to undermine the failed male’s perceived prowess, making him appear less fit in the eyes of observing females.
The act of laughing is strategic, as it shifts female attention towards the laughing male, allowing him to indirectly highlight his own apparent superiority.
The act of laughing is strategic, as it shifts female attention towards the laughing male, allowing him to indirectly highlight his own apparent superiority.
Prowess and Feat Success:
Prowess and Feat Success:
Males possess an inherent, heritable trait called prowess, which determines their likelihood of success in physical feats )or lack of overt failure in anything correlated with prowess).
Females observe these feats and use them as proxies for male fitness. Success increases a male’s attractiveness, while failure reduces it. Thus, with or without laughter, attempting to signal prowess is a risky business, particularly if rivals can draw attention to otherwise unnoticed failures.
Laughter amplifies the effect of failure, as it draws attention to the unsuccessful male, potentially reducing his chances of being chosen by females.
It would be interesting to link feat attempts with prowess.
Females observe these feats and use them as proxies for male fitness. Success increases a male’s attractiveness, while failure reduces it. Thus, with or without laughter, attempting to signal prowess is a risky business, particularly if rivals can draw attention to otherwise unnoticed failures.
Laughter amplifies the effect of failure, as it draws attention to the unsuccessful male, potentially reducing his chances of being chosen by females.
It would be interesting to link feat attempts with prowess.
Female Mate Selection
Female Mate Selection
Females are programmed to choose mates based on observed feats, and laughter influences their perception of male fitness. By shifting their attention to males who laugh at rivals, females may inadvertently reinforce competitive dynamics within the male population.
Evolutionary Dynamics
Evolutionary Dynamics
Over time, males who laugh at rivals’ failures may gain a competitive edge in mating, as they both diminish competitors and highlight their own prowess.
The simulation models the inheritance of prowess across generations, with mutation and selection pressure influencing the evolution of these traits.
Males who can successfully navigate the competitive social dynamics of laughing at others, while maintaining their own high prowess, may see greater reproductive success.
The simulation models the inheritance of prowess across generations, with mutation and selection pressure influencing the evolution of these traits.
Males who can successfully navigate the competitive social dynamics of laughing at others, while maintaining their own high prowess, may see greater reproductive success.
Implications of Laughter in Evolution
Implications of Laughter in Evolution
Laughter becomes a form of social signaling, one that influences female mate choice and male competition. Unlike other theories of laughter that focus on social bonding or humor, this hypothesis positions laughter as a fitness signal in sexual selection.
The cost of failure in competitive environments is magnified through laughter, and this plays a role in shaping both social dynamics and genetic traits like prowess.
The cost of failure in competitive environments is magnified through laughter, and this plays a role in shaping both social dynamics and genetic traits like prowess.
Supporting Stylised facts
Supporting Stylised facts
1. Laughter as a Social Signal and Status Indicator
Laughter is predominantly a social behavior, not just a response to humor. Studies show that 80-90% of laughter occurs during ordinary conversations rather than as a reaction to jokes .
Dominance and hierarchy: In social groups, laughter can function as a signal of dominance or subordination. Individuals in positions of power often use laughter to signal authority or control. Subordinates may laugh more frequently in response as a way of demonstrating submission or seeking acceptance.
Coalition-building: Laughter is often used to strengthen social bonds and align groups against perceived adversaries. In competitive contexts, like athletic events or even evolutionary contexts where mating is involved, laughter can signal alliance formation or exclusion.
Laughter is predominantly a social behavior, not just a response to humor. Studies show that 80-90% of laughter occurs during ordinary conversations rather than as a reaction to jokes .
Dominance and hierarchy: In social groups, laughter can function as a signal of dominance or subordination. Individuals in positions of power often use laughter to signal authority or control. Subordinates may laugh more frequently in response as a way of demonstrating submission or seeking acceptance.
Coalition-building: Laughter is often used to strengthen social bonds and align groups against perceived adversaries. In competitive contexts, like athletic events or even evolutionary contexts where mating is involved, laughter can signal alliance formation or exclusion.
2. Laughter and Competitive Environments
In competitive scenarios, laughter has been observed as a mocking or derisive behavior aimed at reducing the perceived status or prowess of an opponent. This aligns with your hypothesis that laughter serves an evolutionary function by highlighting the failures of rivals, making them appear less attractive to potential mates.
In sports and other competitive settings, taunting or laughing at an opponent’s mistakes is a well-documented phenomenon. This behavior appears to be evolutionarily advantageous as it reduces the opponent’s social status while increasing the laughter’s social dominance .
In competitive scenarios, laughter has been observed as a mocking or derisive behavior aimed at reducing the perceived status or prowess of an opponent. This aligns with your hypothesis that laughter serves an evolutionary function by highlighting the failures of rivals, making them appear less attractive to potential mates.
In sports and other competitive settings, taunting or laughing at an opponent’s mistakes is a well-documented phenomenon. This behavior appears to be evolutionarily advantageous as it reduces the opponent’s social status while increasing the laughter’s social dominance .
3. Laughter’s Link to Evolutionary Fitness and Mate Choice
Sexual selection: Laughter has a role in mate selection. Individuals who laugh more and produce genuine, contagious laughter are often perceived as more attractive and have higher social status. It’s not only a signal of health and fitness but also of social competence.
Assessing social dynamics: Females, in particular, are sensitive to social signals like laughter when evaluating potential mates. They may prefer males who display social dominance (e.g., by laughing at competitors’ failures) but are also capable of positive, affiliative laughter, indicating social competence.
Sexual selection: Laughter has a role in mate selection. Individuals who laugh more and produce genuine, contagious laughter are often perceived as more attractive and have higher social status. It’s not only a signal of health and fitness but also of social competence.
Assessing social dynamics: Females, in particular, are sensitive to social signals like laughter when evaluating potential mates. They may prefer males who display social dominance (e.g., by laughing at competitors’ failures) but are also capable of positive, affiliative laughter, indicating social competence.
4. Laughter as a Mechanism for Attention Direction
Attention manipulation: Laughter can act as an attention magnet, shifting the gaze of others to a specific event, object, or individual. Your hypothesis aligns with this, as laughter could be used to direct the attention of potential mates to the failures of rivals, reducing their attractiveness.
In group settings, laughter typically draws the attention of surrounding individuals, often leading them to align with the person initiating the laughter and to see the target of laughter as less appealing.
Attention manipulation: Laughter can act as an attention magnet, shifting the gaze of others to a specific event, object, or individual. Your hypothesis aligns with this, as laughter could be used to direct the attention of potential mates to the failures of rivals, reducing their attractiveness.
In group settings, laughter typically draws the attention of surrounding individuals, often leading them to align with the person initiating the laughter and to see the target of laughter as less appealing.
5. Laughter as an Evolutionary Adaptation
Laughter is ancient: It is evolutionarily conserved, observed in primates like chimpanzees and bonobos, and often serves a function related to social dominance, play, and coalition-building .
Adaptive flexibility: Laughter’s dual nature—both affiliative (bond-forming) and aggressive (mocking)—makes it a flexible tool for social navigation. This adaptability may have given an evolutionary advantage to individuals who used it effectively to both form alliances and compete for mates.
Laughter is ancient: It is evolutionarily conserved, observed in primates like chimpanzees and bonobos, and often serves a function related to social dominance, play, and coalition-building .
Adaptive flexibility: Laughter’s dual nature—both affiliative (bond-forming) and aggressive (mocking)—makes it a flexible tool for social navigation. This adaptability may have given an evolutionary advantage to individuals who used it effectively to both form alliances and compete for mates.
6. Heritability of Laughter and Behavioral Traits
Studies suggest that aspects of laughter, like its frequency and the context in which it occurs, have a genetic basis. The propensity to laugh and the nature of laughter (e.g., aggressive vs. affiliative) may be heritable traits, consistent with your hypothesis that such traits can be passed down and influenced by evolutionary pressures.
Heritable laughter may contribute to the fitness of offspring by enhancing their ability to navigate social hierarchies and gain access to mates through both dominance displays and positive social interactions.
Studies suggest that aspects of laughter, like its frequency and the context in which it occurs, have a genetic basis. The propensity to laugh and the nature of laughter (e.g., aggressive vs. affiliative) may be heritable traits, consistent with your hypothesis that such traits can be passed down and influenced by evolutionary pressures.
Heritable laughter may contribute to the fitness of offspring by enhancing their ability to navigate social hierarchies and gain access to mates through both dominance displays and positive social interactions.
The Simulation’s Role
The Simulation’s Role
The simulation aims to test and visualize this theory. By modeling male “feats” - attempts to demonstrate prowess , female mate selection, and the dynamics of laughter, the simulation provides a framework to explore how laughter could evolve as a social weapon in competitive mating systems.
Through generations of reproduction, where traits like prowess are inherited and competition is reinforced by social signals like laughter, we can observe how these behaviors could influence the long-term evolution of a population.
Importantly, simulations allow us to observe certain dynamics not readily available to equilibrium analysis. Let me give one example: as cycles progress, laughter may be highly prevalent as the agents move closer to one another in order to be seen at all; however as prowess increases via selection, failures become rare, and laughter ceases almost altogether. It can only be retrieved by introducing “jesters” - creature who deliberately fail (that is, clowns) - or any artificial stimulus to laughter (not implemented).
Through generations of reproduction, where traits like prowess are inherited and competition is reinforced by social signals like laughter, we can observe how these behaviors could influence the long-term evolution of a population.
Importantly, simulations allow us to observe certain dynamics not readily available to equilibrium analysis. Let me give one example: as cycles progress, laughter may be highly prevalent as the agents move closer to one another in order to be seen at all; however as prowess increases via selection, failures become rare, and laughter ceases almost altogether. It can only be retrieved by introducing “jesters” - creature who deliberately fail (that is, clowns) - or any artificial stimulus to laughter (not implemented).
The Simulation
The Simulation
Parameters
Parameters
In[]:=
SetDirectory[NotebookDirectory[]];(*Parameters:*)numFemales=10;numMales=100;spaceSize=15;mutationRate=0.02;featProbability=0.5;viewDistance=2;gravityStrength=0.03;minDistance=0.2;maxCycles=1000;reproductionRate=10;frameRate=3;frames={};(*Environment:*)backgroundColor=RGBColor[0.05,0.05,0.2];(*Gradientdarkbluebackground*)region=Disk[{spaceSize/2,spaceSize/2},spaceSize/2];(*Petridish*)regionCenter=RegionCentroid[region];(*Agentcolors:*)maleColor=RGBColor[0.6,0.8,1];(*Pastellightblueformales*)femaleColor=RGBColor[0.8,0.5,0.9];(*Pastelpurpleforfemales*)successColor=RGBColor[0.7,1,0.7];(*Pastelgreenforsuccess*)failureColor=RGBColor[1,0.6,0.6];(*Pastelredforfailure*)laughColor=RGBColor[0.9,0.7,0.2];(*Softorangeforlaughter*)arrowColor=RGBColor[0.7,0.7,1,0.5];(*Pastellightblueforarrows*)(*Initializetrackinglists:*)avgProwessList={};featAttemptsList={};laughterCountList={};avgLaughterProbabilityList={};(*Initializepositionsandfitness:*)malePositions=RandomPoint[region,numMales];femalePositions=RandomPoint[region,numFemales];maleFeatStatus=Table["None",{numMales}];maleLaughStatus=Table[None,{numMales}];maleFitness=RandomReal[{0.5,1},numMales];maleLaughterProbability=RandomReal[{0.0,0.9},numMales];
Functions
Functions
In[]:=
(*Calculateagravity-likeforcebetweenmalesandfemales:*)ClearAll[gravityForce];gravityForce[malePos_,femalePos_]:=Module distance, direction, force, diff=femalePos-malePos , distance=Max[Norm[diff],minDistance]; direction=diffdistance; force=(gravityStrength*direction)distance;
In[]:=
(*Stopagentsfromleavingtheenvironment:*)ClearAll[boundaryCheck];boundaryCheck[agent_]:=If Norm[agent-regionCenter]>spaceSize2, Normalize[agent-regionCenter]*(spaceSize/2)+regionCenter, agent;
In[]:=
(*Movemalestowardsfemales:*)ClearAll[moveMales];moveMales[]:=Do Module totalForce, randomMove , (*Moveeachmaletowardsthenearestfemales,plusarandomperturbation:*) totalForce=Total Table gravityForce[malePositions[[i]],femalePositions[[j]]], {j,1,numFemales} ; randomMove=RandomReal[{-0.005,0.005},2]; malePositions[[i]]+=totalForce+randomMove; (*Ensuretheystaywithintheenvironment:*) malePositions[[i]]=boundaryCheck[malePositions[[i]]]; , {i,1,numMales};
Simulation
Simulation
Visualization
Visualization
Export / Import GIF
Export / Import GIF
Explanation
Explanation
1. Initialisation
1. Initialisation
These are initial parameters determining the appearance of the simulation (the palette and size of the landscape) and the area in which the agents can perceive the acts of others or hear laughter (i.e., earshot). featProbability - is the chance a Male tries to impress - should be modelled as a heritable trait of course, but there are so many wonderful variations of this simulation I am leaving that for now! The mutation rate determines perturbations to progeny.
Th initial population is distributed randomly over the landscape, arrays are set up to track statuses, and prowess is allocated randomly. Prowess is positively related to feat success - and unobservable fitness measure the Males try to reveal by attempting feats.
2. Movement
2. Movement
This section defines key functions:
gravityForce calculates the force between a male and a female, pulling the male towards the female. The force is inversely proportional to the distance between them, with a cap to prevent excessive force when the distance is too small.
repulsionForce calculates the repulsive force between females, encouraging females to move away from each other, which models the desire to maintain privacy while observing males.
inFemaleGaze checks if a given male is within the gaze of any female. If a male is within a female’s gaze, they will not move towards females but instead make small random movements.
moveMales governs the movement of males. If they are not in the gaze of a female, they move towards females based on the gravity-like attraction. Otherwise, they exhibit small random movement.
moveFemales governs the movement of females. Females are attracted to males and repelled from other females, creating a balance between observing males and maintaining privacy.
gravityForce calculates the force between a male and a female, pulling the male towards the female. The force is inversely proportional to the distance between them, with a cap to prevent excessive force when the distance is too small.
repulsionForce calculates the repulsive force between females, encouraging females to move away from each other, which models the desire to maintain privacy while observing males.
inFemaleGaze checks if a given male is within the gaze of any female. If a male is within a female’s gaze, they will not move towards females but instead make small random movements.
moveMales governs the movement of males. If they are not in the gaze of a female, they move towards females based on the gravity-like attraction. Otherwise, they exhibit small random movement.
moveFemales governs the movement of females. Females are attracted to males and repelled from other females, creating a balance between observing males and maintaining privacy.
3. “Feats” and Laughter mechanism
3. “Feats” and Laughter mechanism
Males laugh at others’ failures if they are within a certain proximity (view distance). This function tracks the number of times laughter occurs in each cycle, contributing to the overall laughter count. There is no cost to laughter. Also, it is intrinsic to all Males and not heritable. This is next on my list.
4. Reproduction and Fitness Inheritance
4. Reproduction and Fitness Inheritance
Generally, with Female imposed selection pressure, males with higher apparent prowess are more likely to reproduce, passing on their fitness with slight mutation. Females do not see prowess directly, they see feat attempts that succeed or fail, and may see additional failures if directed by a male via laughter. It is implicitly assumed that Males succeeding in feats draw attention to this. Again, there is a good deal of rich behavioural possibilities here.
In this function, males and females reproduce at regular intervals (e.g., every 50 cycles). A selection process takes place where males with higher fitness are more likely to reproduce. The offspring inherit traits (including a slightly mutated prowess). The positions of offspring are placed near the parents to maintain proximity. After reproduction, the old males and females are replaced by their offspring. Specifically:
Observed Successes: If a female has observed males succeeding in feats, she selects from those males.
Observed Failures: If a female has observed males failing, she avoids those males.
Random Selection: If a female has not observed any males, she selects randomly from the entire male population, without regard for prowess or feat performance
In this function, males and females reproduce at regular intervals (e.g., every 50 cycles). A selection process takes place where males with higher fitness are more likely to reproduce. The offspring inherit traits (including a slightly mutated prowess). The positions of offspring are placed near the parents to maintain proximity. After reproduction, the old males and females are replaced by their offspring. Specifically:
Observed Successes: If a female has observed males succeeding in feats, she selects from those males.
Observed Failures: If a female has observed males failing, she avoids those males.
Random Selection: If a female has not observed any males, she selects randomly from the entire male population, without regard for prowess or feat performance
6. . Main Simulation Loop and Visualisation
6. . Main Simulation Loop and Visualisation
This function constructs the graphical elements for each cycle. It displays males, females, vision circles, and arrows indicating laughter. It also updates the plots showing average prowess, success rate, and laughter count.
The core loop that runs the simulation for a specified number of cycles, updating male and female positions, checking feats and laughter, and reproducing after every 50 cycles. It also prints progress updates and exports the final results as an animated GIF. I produce a GIF rather than manipulate as it’s nice to paste into various places online!
Notes
Notes
Gravity - like Attraction and Its Role in Comparison Shopping
In this simulation, the gravity - like attraction between males and females is not an evolutionary trait but instead serves as a mechanism to simulate comparison shopping . Females move closer to males based on their positions, allowing them to observe feats and compare potential mates . The use of a gravity - like force ensures that females are drawn toward males, enabling them to gather relevant information for mate selection . While this attraction doesn' t evolve as a trait, it reflects behavior where individuals evaluate multiple options, a common strategy in both natural and artificial selection environments . And as in the previous section, it is likely there are strong early evolutionary benefits to clustering among kin .
Female Laughter and its Strategic Implications
Females have no inherent incentive to laugh at male failures because doing so reveals valuable information to competing females . In a competitive mating environment, laughter could alert others to a male' s failure, which would diminish the female' s exclusive access to that information . Despite this, females may inherit laughter as a trait directly from their father or mother, or due to genetic drift or other mechanisms . This introduces an interesting dynamic where laughter becomes a liability for females, perhaps leading to a strategic distancing from other females . By keeping their distance, females can observe feats without alerting others, safeguarding their information advantage . This trait, if inherited, reflects a balance between social behavior and personal reproductive strategy .
Specifically, traits that can express themselves even if only one copy of the gene (allele) is present. Laughter could be modeled as dominant, allowing any individual with a high propensity for laughter (male or female) to express it.
Traits that require two copies of the gene to express, making laughter recessive would imply that both parents must carry the trait for it to be expressed in offspring, potentially limiting its spread unless there is a clear evolutionary advantage to it.
In our model, laughter can be modeled as a neutral or dominant trait, meaning that both males and females can inherit and express it. Here’s what we can do:
Options:
Laughter as a Neutral/Dominant Trait: In this case, laughter is heritable by both sexes, with no specific bias for females. The current code assumes this (laughter can evolve and propagate in both males and females).
Laughter as a Recessive Trait: We could model laughter as a recessive trait, making it less likely to be expressed unless both parents carry it. However, there would need to be an evolutionary incentive for this (which may not apply here if laughter is equally useful for males and females).
In this simulation, the gravity - like attraction between males and females is not an evolutionary trait but instead serves as a mechanism to simulate comparison shopping . Females move closer to males based on their positions, allowing them to observe feats and compare potential mates . The use of a gravity - like force ensures that females are drawn toward males, enabling them to gather relevant information for mate selection . While this attraction doesn' t evolve as a trait, it reflects behavior where individuals evaluate multiple options, a common strategy in both natural and artificial selection environments . And as in the previous section, it is likely there are strong early evolutionary benefits to clustering among kin .
Female Laughter and its Strategic Implications
Females have no inherent incentive to laugh at male failures because doing so reveals valuable information to competing females . In a competitive mating environment, laughter could alert others to a male' s failure, which would diminish the female' s exclusive access to that information . Despite this, females may inherit laughter as a trait directly from their father or mother, or due to genetic drift or other mechanisms . This introduces an interesting dynamic where laughter becomes a liability for females, perhaps leading to a strategic distancing from other females . By keeping their distance, females can observe feats without alerting others, safeguarding their information advantage . This trait, if inherited, reflects a balance between social behavior and personal reproductive strategy .
Specifically, traits that can express themselves even if only one copy of the gene (allele) is present. Laughter could be modeled as dominant, allowing any individual with a high propensity for laughter (male or female) to express it.
Traits that require two copies of the gene to express, making laughter recessive would imply that both parents must carry the trait for it to be expressed in offspring, potentially limiting its spread unless there is a clear evolutionary advantage to it.
In our model, laughter can be modeled as a neutral or dominant trait, meaning that both males and females can inherit and express it. Here’s what we can do:
Options:
Laughter as a Neutral/Dominant Trait: In this case, laughter is heritable by both sexes, with no specific bias for females. The current code assumes this (laughter can evolve and propagate in both males and females).
Laughter as a Recessive Trait: We could model laughter as a recessive trait, making it less likely to be expressed unless both parents carry it. However, there would need to be an evolutionary incentive for this (which may not apply here if laughter is equally useful for males and females).
Tests
Tests
Here, I was checking whether agents outside the disk were being teleported back to the edge correctly:
During my testing, I put SeedRandom[seed] at the top of each code cell, then set a seed at the top of the notebook. This enabled me to get consistent results when running the code multiple times:
CITE THIS NOTEBOOK
CITE THIS NOTEBOOK
Simulating laughter role as social signaling in competitive mating systems
by Paul Harrald
Wolfram Community, STAFF PICKS, October 22, 2024
https://community.wolfram.com/groups/-/m/t/3304516
by Paul Harrald
Wolfram Community, STAFF PICKS, October 22, 2024
https://community.wolfram.com/groups/-/m/t/3304516