|
|
Kiley, M. (1972). The vocalizations of ungulates, their causation and function. Z. Tierpsychol., 31(2), 171–222.
|
|
|
|
Seyfarth, R. M., & Cheney, D. L. (1992). Meaning and mind in monkeys. Sci Am, 267(6), 122–128.
|
|
|
|
Bergmann, H. H., Klaus, S., Muller, F., & Wiesner, J. (1975). [Individuality and type specificity in the songs of a population of hazel grouse (Bonasa bonasia bonasia L., Tetraoninae, Phasianidae)]. Behaviour, 55(1-2), 94–114.
|
|
|
|
Stober, M., & Geiger, J. F. (1975). [Lamenting “moaning” in domestic cattle]. Dtsch Tierarztl Wochenschr, 82(1), 10–13.
|
|
|
|
Menzel, E. W. J. (1971). Communication about the environment in a group of young chimpanzees. Folia Primatol (Basel), 15(3), 220–232.
|
|
|
|
Dunbar, R. (2003). Evolution of the social brain. Science, 302(5648), 1160–1161.
|
|
|
|
Hrdy, S. B. (1974). Male-male competition and infanticide among the langurs (Presbytis entellus) of Abu, Rajasthan. Folia Primatol (Basel), 22(1), 19–58.
|
|
|
|
Rendall, D., Cheney, D. L., & Seyfarth, R. M. (2000). Proximate factors mediating “contact” calls in adult female baboons (Papio cynocephalus ursinus) and their infants. J Comp Psychol, 114(1), 36–46.
Abstract: “Contact” calls are widespread in social mammals and birds, but the proximate factors that motivate call production and mediate their contact function remain poorly specified. Field study of chacma baboons (Papio cynocephalus ursinus) revealed that contact barks in adult females were motivated by separation both from the group at large and from their dependent infants. A variety of social and ecological factors affect the probability of separation from either one or both. Results of simultaneous observations and a playback experiment indicate that the contact function of calling between mothers and infants was mediated by occasional maternal retrieval rather than coordinated call exchange. Mothers recognized the contact barks of their own infants and often were strongly motivated to locate them. However, mothers did not produce contact barks in reply unless they themselves were at risk of becoming separated from the group.
|
|
|
|
Schmidt, R., Amrhein, V., Kunc, H. P., & Naguib, M. (2007). The day after: effects of vocal interactions on territory defence in nightingales. T. J. Anim. Ecol., 76(1), 168–173.
Abstract: 1. Models on territory acquisition and tenure predict that territorial animals benefit by adjusting territorial defence behaviour to previous challenges they had experienced within the socially complex environment of communication networks. 2. Here, we addressed such issues of social cognition by investigating persisting effects of vocal contests on territory defence behaviour in nightingales Luscinia megarhynchos (Brehm). 3. Using interactive playback during nocturnal song of subjects, a rival was simulated to countersing either aggressively (by song overlapping) or moderately (by song alternating) from outside the subjects' territory. Thereby, the time-specific singing strategy provided an experimentally controlled source of information on the motivation of an unfamiliar rival. 4. Expecting that nightingales integrate information with time, the same rival was simulated to return as a moderately singing intruder on the following morning. 5. The results show that the vigour with which male nightingales responded to the simulated intrusion of an opponent during the day depended on the nature of the nocturnal vocal interaction experienced several hours before. 6. Males that had received the song overlapping playback the preceding night approached the simulated intruder more quickly and closer and sang more songs near the loudspeaker than did males that had received a song alternating playback. 7. This adjustment of territory defence strategies depending on information from prior signalling experience suggests that integrating information with time plays an important part in territory defence by affecting a male's decision making in a communication network.
|
|
|
|
Zentall, T. R. (2004). Action imitation in birds. Learn Behav, 32(1), 15–23.
Abstract: Action imitation, once thought to be a behavior almost exclusively limited to humans and the great apes, surprisingly also has been found in a number of bird species. Because imitation has been viewed by some psychologists as a form of intelligent behavior, there has been interest in how it is distributed among animal species. Although the mechanisms responsible for action imitation are not clear, we are now at least beginning to understand the conditions under which it occurs. In this article, I try to identify and differentiate the various forms of socially influenced behavior (species-typical social reactions, social effects on motivation, social effects on perception, socially influenced learning, and action imitation) and explain why it is important to differentiate imitation from other forms of social influence. I also examine some of the variables that appear to be involved in the occurrence of imitation. Finally, I speculate about why a number of bird species, but few mammal species, appear to imitate.
|
|
