Abstract: Right hemispheric dominance in unconscious emotional processing has been suggested, but remains controversial. This issue was investigated using the subliminal affective priming paradigm combined with unilateral visual presentation in 40 normal subjects. In either left or right visual fields, angry facial expressions, happy facial expressions, or plain gray images were briefly presented as negative, positive, and control primes, followed by a mosaic mask. Then nonsense target ideographs were presented, and the subjects evaluated their partiality toward the targets. When the stimuli were presented in the left, but not the right, visual fields, the negative primes reduced the subjects' liking for the targets, relative to the case of the positive or control primes. These results provided behavioral evidence supporting the hypothesis that the right hemisphere is dominant for unconscious negative emotional processing.

Abstract: Abstract The right brain hemisphere, connected to the left eye, coordinates fight and flight behaviors in a wide variety of vertebrate species. We investigated whether left eye vision predominates in dairy cows’ interactions with other cows and humans, and whether dominance status affects the extent of visual lateralization. Although we found no overall lateralization of eye use to view other cows during interactions, cows that were submissive in an interaction were more likely to use their left eye to view a dominant animal. Both subordinate and older cows were more likely to use their left eye to view other cattle during interactions. Cows that predominantly used their left eye during aggressive interactions were more likely to use their left eye to view a person in unfamiliar clothing in the middle of a track by passing them on the right side. However, a person in familiar clothing was viewed predominantly with the right eye when they passed mainly on the left side. Cows predominantly using their left eyes in cow-to-cow interactions showed more overt responses to restraint in a crush compared with cows who predominantly used their right eyes during interactions (crush scores: left eye users 7.9, right eye users 6.4, standard error of the difference = 0.72). Thus, interactions between 2 cows and between cows and people were visually lateralized, with losing and subordinate cows being more likely to use their left eyes to view winning and dominant cattle and unfamiliar humans.

Abstract: Methods to describe dominance hierarchies are a key tool in primatology studies. Most current methods are appropriate for analyzing linear and near-linear hierarchies; however, more complex structures are common in primate groups. We propose a method termed “dominance-directed tree.” This method is based on graph theory and set theory to analyze dominance relationships in social groups. The method constructs a transitive matrix by imposing transitivity to the dominance matrix and produces a graphical representation of the dominance relationships, which allows an easy visualization of the hierarchical position of the individuals, or subsets of individuals. The method is also able to detect partial and complete hierarchies, and to describe situations in which hierarchical and nonhierarchical principles operate. To illustrate the method, we apply a dominance tree analysis to artificial data and empirical data from a group of Cebus apella.

Abstract: Patterns of aggressive and affiliative behavior, such as counter aggression and reconciliation, are said to covary in the genus Macaca; this is referred to as the systematic variation hypothesis. These behavior patterns constitute a species dominance style. Van Schaik's [1989] socioecological model explains dominance style in macaques in terms of within- and between-group contest competition. Dominance style is also said to correlate with phylogeny in macaques. The present study was undertaken to examine phylogenetic and socioecological explanations of dominance style, as well as the systematic variation hypothesis. We collected data on counter aggression and reconciliation from a habituated group of Assamese macaques (Macaca assamensis) at the Tukeswari Temple in Assam, India. The proportion of agonistic episodes that involved counter aggression was relatively low. Counter aggression, however, occurred more often among males than among females, and it was most common when females initiated aggression against males. The conciliatory tendency for this group of Assamese macaques was 11.2%. The frequency of reconciliation was low for fights among males and for fights among females, but reconciliation was particularly rare for opposite-sexed opponents. Female social relationships were consistent with the systematic variation hypothesis, and suggest a despotic dominance style. A despotic dominance style in Assamese macaques weakens the correlation between dominance style and phylogeny in macaques, but it is not inconsistent with the socioecological model. Male-female relationships were not well explained by the despotic-egalitarian framework, and males may well have more tolerant social relationships than do females. Sex differences need to be considered when categorizing species according to dominance style.