Abstract: In recent years evidence has been accumulating that personalities are not only found in humans but also in a wide range of other animal species. Individuals differ consistently in their behavioural tendencies and the behaviour in one context is correlated with the behaviour in multiple other contexts. From an adaptive perspective, the evolution of animal personalities is still a mystery, because a more flexible structure of behaviour should provide a selective advantage. Accordingly, many researchers view personalities as resulting from constraints imposed by the architecture of behaviour (but see ref. 12). In contrast, we show here that animal personalities can be given an adaptive explanation. Our argument is based on the insight that the trade-off between current and future reproduction often results in polymorphic populations in which some individuals put more emphasis on future fitness returns than others. Life-history theory predicts that such differences in fitness expectations should result in systematic differences in risk-taking behaviour. Individuals with high future expectations (who have much to lose) should be more risk-averse than individuals with low expectations. This applies to all kinds of risky situations, so individuals should consistently differ in their behaviour. By means of an evolutionary model we demonstrate that this basic principle results in the evolution of animal personalities. It simultaneously explains the coexistence of behavioural types, the consistency of behaviour through time and the structure of behavioural correlations across contexts. Moreover, it explains the common finding that explorative behaviour and risk-related traits like boldness and aggressiveness are common characteristics of animal personalities.

Abstract: Transitive inference (TI) involves using known relationships to deduce unknown ones (for example, using A > B and B > C to infer A > C), and is thus essential to logical reasoning. First described as a developmental milestone in children, TI has since been reported in nonhuman primates, rats and birds. Still, how animals acquire and represent transitive relationships and why such abilities might have evolved remain open problems. Here we show that male fish (Astatotilapia burtoni) can successfully make inferences on a hierarchy implied by pairwise fights between rival males. These fish learned the implied hierarchy vicariously (as 'bystanders'), by watching fights between rivals arranged around them in separate tank units. Our findings show that fish use TI when trained on socially relevant stimuli, and that they can make such inferences by using indirect information alone. Further, these bystanders seem to have both spatial and featural representations related to rival abilities, which they can use to make correct inferences depending on what kind of information is available to them. Beyond extending TI to fish and experimentally demonstrating indirect TI learning in animals, these results indicate that a universal mechanism underlying TI is unlikely. Rather, animals probably use multiple domain-specific representations adapted to different social and ecological pressures that they encounter during the course of their natural lives.

Abstract: The communication of aggressive motivation or fighting ability has important fitness consequences for competing animals. Selection should favour rapid and honest communication between opponents to settle dominance relationships while avoiding prolonged and intense fighting. We investigated factors that influence fighting strategies and contest outcomes in female house finches, Carpodacus mexicanus, specifically focusing on the following questions. (1) What social contexts trigger an aggressive response? (2) Does body size and condition contribute to female fighting ability? (3) Do contextual factors, such as mate presence, nest status, nest proximity, and site experience contribute to fighting motivation? (4) Does contest intensity and duration increase as the differences in fighting ability between opponents decrease? (5) What is the relative contribution of fighting ability and aggressive motivation to the outcome of a contest? We found that aggression was triggered most frequently by female intrusions in the vicinity of nest and by extrapair female intrusions on an established pair. Female fighting and contest outcomes were strongly influenced by body condition and body size, and females were more motivated to initiate fights and won more contests when their mates were present. Females at the later breeding stages and those fighting closer to their nests were dominant and won more fights compared to females at earlier breeding stages or further from their nests. Females initiated a greater proportion of contests against opponents with similar local familiarity and breeding history. Escalated and prolonged contests, while rare, occurred exclusively between females of the most similar body size and condition. When differences in body condition between opponents are not easily perceived, contestants might escalate contests for more reliable assessments of relative fighting ability. Finally, body condition was not a strong determinant of contest outcome in the contexts with easily assessed differences in the resource value (e.g. mate presence), but without these motivational differences, body condition was the ultimate determinant of contest outcomes.

Abstract: The traditional notion of aggression as an antisocial instinct is being replaced by a framework that considers it a tool of competition and negotiation. When survival depends on mutual assistance, the expression of aggression is constrained by the need to maintain beneficial relationships. Moreover, evolution has produced ways of countering its disruptive consequences. For example, chimpanzees kiss and embrace after fights, and other nonhuman primates engage in similar “reconciliations.” Theoretical developments in this field carry implications for human aggression research. From families to high schools, aggressive conflict is subject to the same constraints known of cooperative animal societies. It is only when social relationships are valued that one can expect the full complement of natural checks and balances.