|
King, A. J., & Cowlishaw, G. (2009). Leaders, followers and group decision-making. Commun Integr Biol, 2(2), 147–150.
Abstract: Social animals have to make a multitude of group decisions on a daily basis. At the most basic level, this will involve coordination of activities and travel directions. In groups of insects, birds and fish, much of this 'coordination' can be the result of relatively simple interaction patterns among group members. Such systems are self-organizing, and often do not require specific leaders, or followers. However, in more socially complex groups, achieving collective group action-a consensus-may not be accomplished by simple rules alone. Instead, a consensus may be reached by the averaging of preferences (democracy), or by following the choices of specific leaders (despotism). In this mini-review, we discuss the conditions necessary for despotism in animal groups, and focus upon new studies investigating coordinated actions in primates. We ask how specific leaders arise and why others follow them-providing new insight into the mechanisms of effective leadership in groups characterized by strong social relationships.
|
|
|
Vallortigara, G., Chiandetti, C., & Sovrano, V. A. (2011). Brain asymmetry (animal). WIREs Cogn Sci, 2(2), 146–157.
Abstract: Once considered a uniquely human attribute, brain asymmetry has been proved to be ubiquitous among non-human animals. A synthetic review of evidence of animal lateralization in the motor, sensory, cognitive, and affective domains is provided, together with a discussion of its development and possible biological functions. It is argued that investigation of brain asymmetry in a comparative perspective may favor the link between classical neuropsychological studies and modern developmental and evolutionary biology approaches. WIREs Cogni Sci 2011 2 146–157 DOI: 10.1002/wcs.100 For further resources related to this article, please visit the WIREs website
|
|
|
Russell, C. L., Bard, K. A., & Adamson, L. B. (1997). Social referencing by young chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). J. Comp. Psychol., 111(2), 185–191.
Abstract: Social referencing is the seeking of information from another individual and the use of that information to evaluate a situation. It is a well-documented ability in human infants but has not been studied experimentally in nonhuman primates. Seventeen young nursery-reared chimpanzees (14 to 41 months old) were observed in a standard social referencing paradigm in which they received happy and fear messages concerning novel objects from a familiar human caregiver. Each chimpanzee looked referentially at their caregiver, and the emotional messages that they received differentially influenced their gaze behavior and avoidance of the novel objects. It is concluded that chimpanzees can acquire information about their complex social and physical environments through social referencing and can use emotional information to alter their own behavior. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)
|
|
|
Russon, A. E., & Galdikas, B. M. F. (1995). Constraints on great apes' imitation: Model and action selectivity in rehabilitant orangutan (Pongo pygmaeus) imitation. J. Comp. Psychol., 109(1), 5–17.
Abstract: We discuss selectivity in great ape imitation, on the basis of an observational study of spontaneous imitation in free-ranging rehabilitant orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus). Research on great ape imitation has neglected selectivity, although comparative evidence suggests it may be important. We observed orangutans in central Indonesian Borneo and assessed patterns in the models and actions they spontaneously imitated. The patterns we found resembled those reported in humans. Orangutans preferred models with whom they had positive affective relationships (e.g., important caregiver or older sibling) and actions that reflected their current competence, were receptively familiar, and were relevant to tasks that faced them. Both developmental and individual variability were found. We discuss the probable functions of imitation for great apes and the role of selectivity in directing it. We also make suggestions for more effective elicitation of imitation. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
|
|
|
Schino, G., di Sorrentino, E. P., & Tiddi, B. (2007). Grooming and coalitions in Japanese macaques (<em>Macaca fuscata</em>): Partner choice and the time frame reciprocation. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 121(2), 181–188.
Abstract: Evidence of a reciprocal exchange of grooming and agonistic support in primates is mixed. In this study, the authors analyzed a large database of grooming and coalitions in captive female Japanese macaques (Macaca fuscata) to investigate their within-group distribution and temporal relations. Macaques groomed preferentially those individuals that groomed them most and supported preferentially those individuals that supported them most. They also supported preferentially those individuals that groomed them most and groomed preferentially those individuals that supported them most. These results were not explained by covariation of grooming and support with third variables such as kinship, rank, or time spent in proximity. However, receiving grooming did not increase the short-term probability of supporting a partner, and being supported did not increase the short-term probability of grooming a partner. The proximate mechanisms underlying the exchange of services were discussed in relation to the time frame of the behavioral choices made by the monkeys. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
|
|
|
Romero, T., & Aureli, F. (2008). Reciprocity of support in coatis (Nasua nasua). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 122(1), 19–25.
Abstract: Primate sociality has received much attention and its complexity has been viewed as a driving force for the evolution of cognitive abilities. Improved analytic techniques have allowed primate researchers to reveal intricate social networks based on the exchange of cooperative acts and services. Although nonprimates are known to show similar behavior (e.g., cooperative hunting, food sharing, coalitions) there seems a consensus that social life is less complex than in primates. Here the authors present the first group-level analysis of reciprocity of social interactions in a social carnivore, the ring-tailed coati (<xh:i xmlns:search=“http://marklogic.com/appservices/search” xmlns=“http://apa.org/pimain” xmlns:xsi=“http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance” xmlns:xh=“http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml”>Nasua nasua</xh:i>). The authors found that support in aggressive conflicts is a common feature in coatis and that this behavior is reciprocally exchanged in a manner seemingly as complex as in primates. Given that reciprocity correlations persisted after controlling for the effect of spatial association and subunit membership, some level of scorekeeping may be involved. Further studies will be needed to confirm our findings and understand the mechanisms underlying such reciprocity, but our results contribute to the body of work that has begun to challenge primate supremacy in social complexity and cognition. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
|
|
|
Quaresmini, C., Forrester, G. S., Spiezio, C., & Vallortigara, G. (2014). Social environment elicits lateralized behaviors in gorillas (Gorilla gorilla gorilla) and chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 128(3), 276–284.
Abstract: The influence of the social environment on lateralized behaviors has now been investigated across a wide variety of animal species. New evidence suggests that the social environment can modulate behavior. Currently, there is a paucity of data relating to how primates navigate their environmental space, and investigations that consider the naturalistic context of the individual are few and fragmented. Moreover, there are competing theories about whether only the right or rather both cerebral hemispheres are involved in the processing of social stimuli, especially in emotion processing. Here we provide the first report of lateralized social behaviors elicited by great apes. We employed a continuous focal animal sampling method to record the spontaneous interactions of a captive zoo-living colony of chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and a biological family group of peer-reared western lowland gorillas (Gorilla gorilla gorilla). We specifically focused on which side of the body (i.e., front, rear, left, right) the focal individual preferred to keep conspecifics. Utilizing a newly developed quantitative corpus-coding scheme, analysis revealed both chimpanzees and gorillas demonstrated a significant group-level preference for focal individuals to keep conspecifics positioned to the front of them compared with behind them. More interestingly, both groups also manifested a population-level bias to keep conspecifics on their left side compared with their right side. Our findings suggest a social processing dominance of the right hemisphere for context-specific social environments. Results are discussed in light of the evolutionary adaptive value of social stimulus as a triggering factor for the manifestation of group-level lateralized behaviors. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)
|
|
|
Branson, N. J., & Rogers, L. J. (2006). Relationship between paw preference strength and noise phobia in Canis familiaris. J. Comp. Psychol., 120(3), 176–183.
Abstract: The authors investigated the relationship between degree of lateralization and noise phobia in 48 domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) by scoring paw preference to hold a food object and relating it to reactivity to the sounds of thunderstorms and fireworks, measured by playback and a questionnaire. The dogs without a significant paw preference were significantly more reactive to the sounds than the dogs with either a left-paw or right-paw preference. Intense reactivity, therefore, is associated with a weaker strength of cerebral lateralization. The authors note the similarity between their finding and the weaker hand preferences shown in humans suffering extreme levels of anxiety and suggest neural mechanisms that may be involved. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)
|
|
|
Call, J., & Tomasello, M. (1995). Use of social information in the problem solving of orangutans (<em>Pongo pygmaeus</em>) and human children (<em>Homo sapiens</em>). J. Comp. Psychol., 109(3), 308–320.
Abstract: Fourteen juvenile and adult orangutans and 24 3- and 4-yr-old children participated in 4 studies on imitative learning in a problem-solving situation. In all studies a simple to operate apparatus was used, but its internal mechanism was hidden from subjects to prevent individual learning. In the 1st study, orangutans observed a human demonstrator perform 1 of 4 actions on the apparatus and obtain a reward; they subsequently showed no signs of imitative learning. Similar results were obtained in a 2nd study in which orangutan demonstrators were used. Similar results were also obtained in a 3rd study in which a human encouraged imitation from an orangutan that had previously been taught to mimic arbitrary human actions. In a 4th study, human 3- and 4-yr-old children learned the task by means of imitation. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)
|
|
|
Heffner, R. S., & Heffner, H. E. (1983). Hearing in large mammals: Horses (Equus caballus) and cattle (Bos taurus). Behavioral Neuroscience, 97(2), 299–309.
Abstract: Determined behavioral audiograms for 3 horses and 2 cows. Horses' hearing ranged from 55 Hz to 33.3 kHz, with a region of best sensitivity from 1 to 16 kHz. Cattle hearing ranged from 23 Hz to 35 kHz, with a well-defined point of best sensitivity at 8 kHz. Of the 2 species, cattle proved to have more acute hearing, with a lowest threshold of –21 db (re 20 μN/m–2) compared with the horses' lowest threshold of 7 db. Comparative analysis of the hearing abilities of these 2 species with those of other mammals provides further support for the relation between interaural distance and high-frequency hearing and between high- and low-frequency hearing. (39 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
|
|