|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
Seyfarth, R. M., & Cheney, D. L. (1984). Grooming, alliances and reciprocal altruism in vervet monkeys. Nature, 308(5959), 541–543.
Abstract: Reciprocal altruism refers to the exchange of beneficial acts between individuals, in which the benefits to the recipient exceed the cost to the altruist. Theory predicts that cooperation among unrelated animals can occur whenever individuals encounter each other regularly and are capable of adjusting their cooperative behaviour according to experience. Although the potential for reciprocal altruism exists in many animal societies, most interactions occur between closely related individuals, and examples of reciprocity among non-kin are rare. The field experiments on vervet monkeys which we present here demonstrate that grooming between unrelated individuals increases the probability that they will subsequently attend to each others' solicitations for aid. Vervets appear to be more willing to aid unrelated individuals if those individuals have behaved affinitively toward them in the recent past. In contrast, recent grooming between close genetic relatives appears to have no effect on their willingness to respond to each other's solicitations for aid.
|
|
|
|
Seyfarth, R. M., Cheney, D. L., & Marler, P. (1980). Monkey responses to three different alarm calls: evidence of predator classification and semantic communication. Science, 210(4471), 801–803.
Abstract: Vervet monkeys give different alarm calls to different predators. Recordings of the alarms played back when predators were absent caused the monkeys to run into trees for leopard alarms, look up for eagle alarms, and look down for snake alarms. Adults call primarily to leopards, martial eagles, and pythons, but infants give leopard alarms to various mammals, eagle alarms to many birds, and snake alarms to various snakelike objects. Predator classification improves with age and experience.
|
|
|
|
Janik, V. M. (2000). Whistle matching in wild bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus). Science, 289(5483), 1355–1357.
Abstract: Dolphin communication is suspected to be complex, on the basis of their call repertoires, cognitive abilities, and ability to modify signals through vocal learning. Because of the difficulties involved in observing and recording individual cetaceans, very little is known about how they use their calls. This report shows that wild, unrestrained bottlenose dolphins use their learned whistles in matching interactions, in which an individual responds to a whistle of a conspecific by emitting the same whistle type. Vocal matching occurred over distances of up to 580 meters and is indicative of animals addressing each other individually.
|
|
|
|
Seyfarth, R. M., & Cheney, D. L. (1992). Meaning and mind in monkeys. Sci Am, 267(6), 122–128.
|
|
|
|
Kiley, M. (1972). The vocalizations of ungulates, their causation and function. Z. Tierpsychol., 31(2), 171–222.
|
|
|
|
Seyfarth, R. M., & Cheney, D. L. (2003). Signalers and receivers in animal communication. Annu Rev Psychol, 54, 145–173.
Abstract: In animal communication natural selection favors callers who vocalize to affect the behavior of listeners and listeners who acquire information from vocalizations, using this information to represent their environment. The acquisition of information in the wild is similar to the learning that occurs in laboratory conditioning experiments. It also has some parallels with language. The dichotomous view that animal signals must be either referential or emotional is false, because they can easily be both: The mechanisms that cause a signaler to vocalize do not limit a listener's ability to extract information from the call. The inability of most animals to recognize the mental states of others distinguishes animal communication most clearly from human language. Whereas signalers may vocalize to change a listener's behavior, they do not call to inform others. Listeners acquire information from signalers who do not, in the human sense, intend to provide it.
|
|
|
|
Seyfarth, R. M., & Cheney, D. L. (2003). Meaning and emotion in animal vocalizations. Ann N Y Acad Sci, 1000, 32–55.
Abstract: Historically, a dichotomy has been drawn between the semantic communication of human language and the apparently emotional calls of animals. Current research paints a more complicated picture. Just as scientists have identified elements of human speech that reflect a speaker's emotions, field experiments have shown that the calls of many animals provide listeners with information about objects and events in the environment. Like human speech, therefore, animal vocalizations simultaneously provide others with information that is both semantic and emotional. In support of this conclusion, we review the results of field experiments on the natural vocalizations of African vervet monkeys, diana monkeys, baboons, and suricates (a South African mongoose). Vervet and diana monkeys give acoustically distinct alarm calls in response to the presence of leopards, eagles, and snakes. Each alarm call type elicits a different, adaptive response from others nearby. Field experiments demonstrate that listeners compare these vocalizations not just according to their acoustic properties but also according to the information they convey. Like monkeys, suricates give acoustically distinct alarm calls in response to different predators. Within each predator class, the calls also differ acoustically according to the signaler's perception of urgency. Like speech, therefore, suricate alarm calls convey both semantic and emotional information. The vocalizations of baboons, like those of many birds and mammals, are individually distinctive. As a result, when one baboon hears a sequence of calls exchanged between two or more individuals, the listener acquires information about social events in its group. Baboons, moreover, are skilled “eavesdroppers:” their response to different call sequences provides evidence of the sophisticated information they acquire from other individuals' vocalizations. Baboon males give loud “wahoo” calls during competitive displays. Like other vocalizations, these highly emotional calls provide listeners with information about the caller's dominance rank, age, and competitive ability. Although animal vocalizations, like human speech, simultaneously encode both semantic and emotional information, they differ from language in at least one fundamental respect. Although listeners acquire rich information from a caller's vocalization, callers do not, in the human sense, intend to provide it. Listeners acquire information as an inadvertent consequence of signaler behavior.
|
|
|
|
Heath-Lange, S., Ha, J. C., & Sackett, G. P. (1999). Behavioral measurement of temperament in male nursery-raised infant macaques and baboons. Am. J. Primatol., 47(1), 43–50.
Abstract: We define temperament as an individual's set of characteristic behavioral responses to novel or challenging stimuli. This study adapted a temperament scale used with rhesus macaques by Schneider and colleagues [American Journal of Primatology 25:137-155, 1991] for use with male pigtailed macaque (Macaca nemestrina, n = 7), longtailed macaque (M. fascicularis, n = 3), and baboon infants (Papio cynocephalus anubis, n = 4). Subjects were evaluated twice weekly for the first 5 months of age during routine removal from their cages for weighing. Behavioral measures were based on the subject's interactions with a familiar human caretaker and included predominant state before capture, response to capture, contact latency, resistance to tester's hold, degree of clinging, attention to environment, defecation/urination, consolability, facial expression, vocalizations, and irritability. Species differences indicated that baboons were more active than macaques in establishing or terminating contact with the tester. Temperament scores decreased over time for the variables Response to Capture and Contact Latency, indicating that as they grew older, subjects became less reactive and more bold in their interactions with the tester. Temperament scores changed slowly with age, with greater change occurring at younger ages. The retention of variability in reactivity between and within species may be advantageous for primates, reflecting the flexibility necessary to survive in a changing environment.
|
|
|
|
Stober, M., & Geiger, J. F. (1975). [Lamenting “moaning” in domestic cattle]. Dtsch Tierarztl Wochenschr, 82(1), 10–13.
|
|
