How the mind sees coalitional and group conflict: the evolutionary invariances of n-person conflict dynamics

All conflicts involving three or more or agents can be described using a vocabulary of only four interaction types. Analyzing the cost/benefit calculations of each agent's role within these interactions provides a more precise way to describe the decisions involved in multi-agent conflict. This in turn allows for more precise psychological and selection-dynamic models of groups and coalitions to be proposed and tested. A framework for the psychological representation of coalitional conflict is described. The cost/benefit logic of loyalty, attribution, defensive aggression, coalitional narratives, and social identities falls out from this analysis, as does the mind's operational definition of a “group”.