Abstract: This paper updates and extends Dewsbury's (1982) review of the literature on dominance and reproductive success (RS). The findings from approximately 700 studies are included, over two thirds of which were unavailable to Dewsbury. In order to give a highly condensed and yet meaningful overview, the main findings are represented in four tables, one for male nonprimates, one for female nonprimates, one for male primates, and one for female primates. In the tables for males, findings are analyzed in terms of six different indicators of RS, and in the tables for females, in terms of eight RS indicators. Outside the primate order, evidence largely supported the hypothesis that high-ranking males enjoy greater RS than do subordinate males. For females, studies are more evenly divided between those supporting the hypothesis that high rank and RS are positively correlated and those indicating no significant rank-RS relationship. This may reflect both the lower saliency of hierarchical relationships among females, as well as the lower variability in RS among females, relative to males. Among primates, a complex picture has emerged, especially in the case of males. Much of the complexity appears due to the importance of age and seniority in affecting dominance rank. Also, in some primate species, female preferences for sex partners seem to have little to do with the male's dominance rank, at least at the time mating takes place. Nevertheless, the majority of studies suggest that high- to middle-ranking males have at least a slight lifetime reproductive advantage over the lowest ranking males.

Abstract: In a wide range of animal species, males coerce females to mate with them, either by physically forcing them to mate, by harassing them until they mate or by punishing persistent refusal to mate. The first section of this paper argues that the possibility of forced copulation can generate arms races between males and females that may have substantial costs to both sexes. In the second section, it is suggested that sexual harassment commonly represents a `war of attrition' between the sexes; existing game theory models that may apply to sexual conflict over mating decisions are reviewed. The third section develops a simple prospective model for the evolution of intimidation by punishment in situations where males can raise the probability that females will accept their advances in future by punishing them for refusal to mate. Where the benefits of sexual coercion to males are high, all three male strategies may develop to a point where they have substantial costs to females. In the final section, evidence that female behaviour is adapted to minimizing these costs is reviewed.

Abstract: Interspecific variation in learning and cognition is often accounted for by adaptive specialization, an ecological framework where variation between species in the environmental problems they face is thought to select for quantitatively and/or qualitatively different abilities. Adaptive specialization theory relies on the comparative method for testing its hypotheses and assumes a naturally selected basis for the predicted differences. This review examines social learning as a specialization to group-living and scramble feeding competition. It points out one important problem with current studies in the area, the lack of quantitative controls for confounding variables that may cause type 1 or 2 error in comparative tests. A linear regression technique is proposed to measure and remove interspecific differences on control tests for which there is no predicted adaptive specialization; as in other areas of comparative biology, the adaptive prediction is then made on the residual deviation from the regression of these confounding variables. Examples are given from research on opportunistic Columbids, the group-living feral pigeon Columbia livia, and the territorial Zenaida dove, Zenaida aurita.