Advanced search
1 file | 1.23 MB Add to list

Biological signalling as non-coercive manipulation: revisiting and finetuning the evolutionary definition of a signal

(2026)
Author
Organization
Abstract
We show that definitions of animal signalling thus far failed to adequately distinguish signalling from coercion. We derive a general evolutionary definition of signalling that unambiguously distinguishes signalling from coercion, and that only requires signaller benefit and adaptedness but remains undetermined about receiver benefit and coadaptedness. As such, the scope of this definition is broader than receiver-beneficial (i.e., informative, full-coadaptive) signalling alone, and also includes receiver-costly or parasitic (i.e., mal-informative, not-full-coadaptive) signals. Such a 'broad-spectrum' definition of signalling – which is at the same time sharply delineated from coercion – is increasingly needed, since a signal’s reliability versus unreliability, and even its honesty versus deception, are increasingly being studied as spectrally graded properties of an animal signal, with mixed and variable strategies in a population to be expected. Overall, after decades of enduring ambiguity, crucial concepts, such as ‘coercion’, ‘manipulation’ and ‘signalling’, are elucidated. We conclude with some considerations on how far this evolutionary definition of animal signalling could be applied to ‘Darwinian individuals’ outside the animal kingdom, i.e., among non-animal species and also among within-organism Darwinian individuals like cancer cells and selfish genetic elements, and how this relates to signal transduction in cell signalling.
Keywords
coercion, manipulation, signalling, coadaptation, parasitism, Darwinian individuals, selfish genes, signal transduction

Downloads

  • DeTiège&Verpooten2026.pdf
    • full text
    • |
    • open access
    • |
    • PDF
    • |
    • 1.23 MB

Citation

Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:

MLA
De Tiège, Alexis, and Jan Verpooten. Biological Signalling as Non-Coercive Manipulation: Revisiting and Finetuning the Evolutionary Definition of a Signal. 2026, doi:10.5281/ZENODO.21415618.
APA
De Tiège, A., & Verpooten, J. (2026). Biological signalling as non-coercive manipulation: revisiting and finetuning the evolutionary definition of a signal. https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.21415618
Chicago author-date
De Tiège, Alexis, and Jan Verpooten. 2026. “Biological Signalling as Non-Coercive Manipulation: Revisiting and Finetuning the Evolutionary Definition of a Signal.” https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.21415618.
Chicago author-date (all authors)
De Tiège, Alexis, and Jan Verpooten. 2026. “Biological Signalling as Non-Coercive Manipulation: Revisiting and Finetuning the Evolutionary Definition of a Signal.” doi:10.5281/ZENODO.21415618.
Vancouver
1.
De Tiège A, Verpooten J. Biological signalling as non-coercive manipulation: revisiting and finetuning the evolutionary definition of a signal. 2026.
IEEE
[1]
A. De Tiège and J. Verpooten, “Biological signalling as non-coercive manipulation: revisiting and finetuning the evolutionary definition of a signal.” 2026.
@misc{01KY3KC49ZF7D3QANYSNWH0JJH,
  abstract     = {{We show that definitions of animal signalling thus far failed to adequately distinguish signalling from coercion. We derive a general evolutionary definition of signalling that unambiguously distinguishes signalling from coercion, and that only requires signaller benefit and adaptedness but remains undetermined about receiver benefit and coadaptedness. As such, the scope of this definition is broader than receiver-beneficial (i.e., informative, full-coadaptive) signalling alone, and also includes receiver-costly or parasitic (i.e., mal-informative, not-full-coadaptive) signals. Such a 'broad-spectrum' definition of signalling – which is at the same time sharply delineated from coercion – is increasingly needed, since a signal’s reliability versus unreliability, and even its honesty versus deception, are increasingly being studied as spectrally graded properties of an animal signal, with mixed and variable strategies in a population to be expected. Overall, after decades of enduring ambiguity, crucial concepts, such as ‘coercion’, ‘manipulation’ and ‘signalling’, are elucidated. We conclude with some considerations on how far this evolutionary definition of animal signalling could be applied to ‘Darwinian individuals’ outside the animal kingdom, i.e., among non-animal species and also among within-organism Darwinian individuals like cancer cells and selfish genetic elements, and how this relates to signal transduction in cell signalling.}},
  author       = {{De Tiège, Alexis and Verpooten, Jan}},
  keywords     = {{coercion,manipulation,signalling,coadaptation,parasitism,Darwinian individuals,selfish genes,signal transduction}},
  language     = {{eng}},
  title        = {{Biological signalling as non-coercive manipulation: revisiting and finetuning the evolutionary definition of a signal}},
  url          = {{http://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.21415618}},
  year         = {{2026}},
}

Altmetric
View in Altmetric