|
|
Templeton, J. J. (1998). Learning from others' mistakes: a paradox revisited. Anim. Behav., 55(1), 79–85.
Abstract: Some researchers have reported the paradoxical finding of enhanced social learning when naive observers learn from unskilled rather than skilled demonstrators, particularly in discrimination tasks. In two experiments with starlings,Sturnus vulgaris, I considered whether this enhanced learning is because the observer (1) sees incorrect responses only, (2) sees both correct and incorrect responses or (3) sees an increase in the proportion of correct responses over trials. In experiment 1, individual starlings observed a demonstrator bird perform multiple simultaneous discrimination tasks. In one group, the demonstrator always picked the correct stimulus; in another group, the demonstrator always picked the incorrect stimulus; in a third group, the demonstrator consistently picked the correct stimulus 50% of the time. Those subjects that observed only incorrect choices performed significantly better than the other two groups, but none of the birds achieved the 90% correct performance criterion. Experiment 2 involved a single discrimination task; thus, a fourth group was added to control for individual learning. Again, subjects that observed only incorrect responses learned the discrimination significantly more quickly than the other three groups. Subjects that observed the demonstrator make both correct and incorrect responses were equally likely to select the same (correct) or opposite (incorrect) stimulus when the demonstrator picked the correct stimulus. When the demonstrator picked the incorrect stimulus, however, these subjects were significantly more likely to pick the opposite (correct) stimulus. These findings suggest that when learning a discrimination problem, observing a foraging companion's lack of success is more informative than observing its success.
|
|
|
|
Griffin, A. S. (2008). Social learning in Indian mynahs, Acridotheres tristis: the role of distress calls. Anim. Behav., 75(1), 79–89.
Abstract: Socially acquired predator avoidance is a phenomenon in which individuals acquire an avoidance response towards an initially neutral stimulus after they have experienced it together with the antipredator signals of social companions. Earlier research has established that alarm calls used for intraspecific communication are effective stimuli for triggering acquisition. However, animals produce a large range of other antipredator responses that might engage antipredator learning. Here, I examine the effects of conspecific distress calls, a signal that is produced by birds when restrained by a predator, and that appears to be directed towards predators, rather than conspecifics, on predator avoidance learning in Indian mynahs, Acridotheres tristis. Distress calls reflect high levels of alarm in the caller and should, therefore, mediate robust learning. Experiment 1 revealed that subjects performed higher rates of head movements in response to a previously unfamiliar avian mount after it had been presented simultaneously with playbacks of conspecific distress vocalizations. Experiment 2 revealed that increased rates of head saccades resembled the spontaneous response evoked by a novel stimulus more closely than it resembled the response evoked by a perched raptor, suggesting that distress calls inculcated a visual exploratory response, rather than an antipredator response. While it is usually thought that the level of acquisition in learners follows a simple relationship with the level of alarm shown by demonstrators, the present results suggest that this relationship may be more complex. Antipredator signals with different functions may have differential effects on learners.
|
|
|
|
Hare, B., Addessi, E., Call, J., Tomasello, M., & Visalberghi, E. (2003). Do capuchin monkeys, Cebus apella, know what conspecifics do and do not see? Anim. Behav., 65(1), 131–142.
Abstract: Capuchin monkeys were tested in five experiments in which two individuals competed over food. When given a choice between retrieving a piece of food that was visible or hidden from the dominant, subordinate animals preferred to retrieve hidden food. This preference is consistent with the hypotheses that either (1) the subordinate knew what the dominant could and could not see or (2) the subordinate was monitoring the behaviour of the dominant and avoiding the piece of food that it approached. To test between these alternatives, we released subordinates with a slight head start forcing them to make their choice (between a piece of food hidden or visible to the dominant) before the dominant entered the area. Unlike chimpanzees, Pan troglodytes, subordinates that were given a head start did not preferentially approach hidden pieces of food first. Therefore, our experiments provide little support for the hypothesis that capuchin monkeys are sensitive to what another individual does or does not see. We compare our results with those obtained with chimpanzees in the same paradigm and discuss the evolution of primate social cognition. Copyright 2003 The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
|
|
|
|
Hare, B., Call, J., & Tomasello, M. (2001). Do chimpanzees know what conspecifics know? Anim. Behav., 61(1), 139–151.
Abstract: We conducted three experiments on social problem solving by chimpanzees, Pan troglodytes. In each experiment a subordinate and a dominant individual competed for food, which was placed in various ways on the subordinate's side of two opaque barriers. In some conditions dominants had not seen the food hidden, or food they had seen hidden was moved elsewhere when they were not watching (whereas in control conditions they saw the food being hidden or moved). At the same time, subordinates always saw the entire baiting procedure and could monitor the visual access of their dominant competitor as well. If subordinates were sensitive to what dominants did or did not see during baiting, they should have preferentially approached and retrieved the food that dominants had not seen hidden or moved. This is what they did in experiment 1 when dominants were either uninformed or misinformed about the food's location. In experiment 2 subordinates recognized, and adjusted their behaviour accordingly, when the dominant individual who witnessed the hiding was replaced with another dominant individual who had not witnessed it, thus demonstrating their ability to keep track of precisely who has witnessed what. In experiment 3 subordinates did not choose consistently between two pieces of hidden food, one of which dominants had seen hidden and one of which they had not seen hidden. However, their failure in this experiment was likely to be due to the changed nature of the competition under these circumstances and not to a failure of social-cognitive skills. These findings suggest that at least in some situations (i.e. competition with conspecifics) chimpanzees know what conspecifics have and have not seen (do and do not know), and that they use this information to devise effective social-cognitive strategies. Copyright 2001 The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour.
|
|
|
|
Nicol, C. J., & Pope, S. J. (1999). The effects of demonstrator social status and prior foraging success on social learning in laying hens. Anim. Behav., 57(1), 163–171.
Abstract: Opportunities for social learning within a group of animals are likely to be influenced by the social dynamics of that group. Some individuals may be more influential demonstrators than others even when there are no differences in their skill level or performance. In this study of domestic hens,Gallus gallus domesticus, differences in demonstrator salience were examined. From 24 separate flocks we selected as demonstrators a dominant cockerel, a dominant hen, a mid-ranking hen or a subordinate hen. Demonstrators were pretrained to perform an operant discrimination task to obtain food. Six observers from each flock individually watched the demonstrator perform the task for four 5-min sessions held on consecutive days. On the fifth day observers were tested individually in the operant chamber. We analysed data from 19 flocks, where there were no quantitative differences in demonstrator performance. Observer hens of relatively high social status performed more correct operant pecks than observer hens of relatively low social status. Demonstrator category also had a significant effect on subsequent observer behaviour. Hens that had observed cockerels performed very few general pecks or operant pecks. Hens that had observed dominant hens performed more operant pecks, but hens that had observed sub-ordinate hens performed more general pecks in the chamber. The results suggested either that there was an interaction between dominance and gender in demonstrator salience or that dominant hens might have been influential because of some factor imperfectly associated with their dominance status. A possible candidate was the foraging ability of the dominant hens. In a second experiment using the same protocol, we manipulated the prior foraging success of dominant hens from four additional flocks but this had no significant effect on their subsequent influence as demonstrators.
|
|
|
|
Sayigh, L. S., Tyack, P. L., Wells, R. S., Solow, A. R., Scott, M. D., & Irvine, A. B. (1999). Individual recognition in wild bottlenose dolphins: a field test using playback experiments. Anim. Behav., 57(1), 41–50.
Abstract: We conducted playback experiments with wild bottlenose dolphins, Tursiops truncatus, to determine whether there is sufficient information in their individually distinctive signature whistles for individual recognition. We conducted experiments with members of a resident community of dolphins in waters near Sarasota, Florida, during temporary capture-release projects. We used a paired playback design, wherein the same two whistle sequences were predicted to evoke opposite responses from two different target animals. This design controlled for any unknown cues that may have been present in the playback stimuli. We predicted that mothers would respond more strongly to the whistles of their own independent offspring than to the whistles of a familiar, similar-aged nonoffspring. Similarly, we predicted that independent offspring would respond more strongly to the whistles of their own mother than to the whistles of a familiar, similar-aged female. Target animals were significantly (P<0.02) more likely to respond to the predicted stimuli, with responses measured by the number of head turns towards the playback speaker. In bottlenose dolphin societies, stable, individual-specific relationships are intermixed with fluid patterns of association between individuals. In primate species that live in similar 'fission-fusion' type societies, individual recognition is commonplace. Thus, when taken in the context of what is known about the social structure and behaviour of bottlenose dolphins, these playback experiments suggest that signature whistles are used for individual recognition. Copyright 1999 The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour.
|
|
|
|
Chase, I. D. (1985). The sequential analysis of aggressive acts during hierarchy formation: an application of the `jigsaw puzzle' approach. Anim. Behav., 33(1), 86–100.
Abstract: The `jigsaw puzzle' approach is a general method for investigating how interactions among individuals cumulate to form the overall patterns of dominance behaviour in groups. Here, the model is used to discover how aggressive interactions between pairs of individuals modify subsequent interactions with bystanders or third parties. The model indicates that four sequences of successive, aggressive acts are possible in component triads of larger groups: two ensure transitive attack relationships and two can lead to either transitive or intransitive relationships. An application of the model to 14 groups of four hens demonstrates that the two sequences guaranteeing transitivity make up 77% of all sequences. More specifically, hens attacking one group member usually go on to attack a second member, and hens receiving one attack frequently receive a second attack from a bystander. In contrast, an attacked hen rarely `redirects' an attack to a bystander, and a bystander rarely attacks a group member who has just attacked another individual. The application of the jigsaw puzzle approach to aggressive sequences in other species is discussed. Data available for several primate species corroborate the findings in hens and provide support for the method as a general tool for investigating the proximate mechanisms of hierarchy formation.
|
|
|
|
Boyd, R., & Silk, J. B. (1983). A method for assigning cardinal dominance ranks. Anim. Behav., 31(1), 45–58.
Abstract: Dominance hierarchies are widely described in nature. Commonly, an individual's ordinal rank is used as a measure of its position in the hierarchy, and, therefore its priority of access to resources. This use of ordinal ranks has several related drawbacks: (1) it is difficult to assess the magnitude or the significance of the difference in degree of dominance between two individuals; (2) it is difficult to evaluate the significance of differences between dominance matrices based on different behaviours or on the same behaviour at different times, and (3) it is difficult to use parametric statistical techniques to relate dominance rank to other quantities of interest. In this paper we describe a method for assigning cardinal dominance indices that does not suffer from these drawbacks. This technique is based on the Bradley-Terry model from the method of paired comparisons. We show how this model can be reinterpreted in terms of dominance interactions. and we describe a simple iterative technique for computing cardinal ranks. We then describe how to evaluate (1) whether the rank differences between individuals are significant, and (2) whether differences in the cardinal hierarchies based on different behaviours or the same behaviour at different times are significant. We then show how to generalize the method to deal with behaviours that sometimes have ambiguous outcomes, or behaviours for which the rank difference between a pair of individuals affects the rate of interaction between them.
|
|
|
|
De Vries, H., & Appleby, M. C. (2000). Finding an appropriate order for a hierarchy: a comparison of the I&SI and the BBS methods. Anim. Behav., 59(1), 239–245.
|
|
|
|
Dunbar, R. I., & Dunbar, E. P. (1976). Contrasts in social structure among black-and-white colobus monkey groups. Anim. Behav., 24(1), 84–92.
Abstract: Three types of Colobus guereza groups may be distinguished on the bases of size and composition, namely small one-male groups, large, one-male groups and multi-male groups. The social structure of each type of group is described in terms of the distribution of non-agonistic interactions, the frequency and distribution of agonistic behaviour and the organization of the roles of vigilance, territorial defence and leadership. A number of differences are found between the group types which appear to be related to the differences in group size and composition. It is suggested that these group types represent stages in the life-cycle of colobus groups, and that such an interpretation may help to resolve some of the conflicting reports in the literature.
|
|
