|
|
Bergmann, H. H., Klaus, S., Muller, F., & Wiesner, J. (1975). [Individuality and type specificity in the songs of a population of hazel grouse (Bonasa bonasia bonasia L., Tetraoninae, Phasianidae)]. Behaviour, 55(1-2), 94–114.
|
|
|
|
Stober, M., & Geiger, J. F. (1975). [Lamenting “moaning” in domestic cattle]. Dtsch Tierarztl Wochenschr, 82(1), 10–13.
|
|
|
|
de Waal, F. B., & Johanowicz, D. L. (1993). Modification of reconciliation behavior through social experience: an experiment with two macaque species. Child Dev, 64(3), 897–908.
Abstract: Reconciliation, defined as a friendly reunion between former opponents shortly after an aggressive encounter, is common in the stumptail macaque (Macaca arctoides) but rare in the rhesus macaque (M. mulatta). Juveniles of the two species were cohoused for 5 months, after which they were observed with conspecifics only. Control rhesus monkeys, matched in age and sex to the experimental subjects, went through the same procedure without exposure to the other species. A threefold increase in the proportion of reconciled fights was measured in the rhesus subjects. The difference emerged gradually during cohousing with the tutor species and was sustained following removal of this species. Other behavior, such as grooming and aggression, decreased over time. It is suggested that the social attitude of the subjects was affected through contact with a species characterized by a more relaxed dominance style.
|
|
|
|
Zentall, T. R. (2004). Action imitation in birds. Learn Behav, 32(1), 15–23.
Abstract: Action imitation, once thought to be a behavior almost exclusively limited to humans and the great apes, surprisingly also has been found in a number of bird species. Because imitation has been viewed by some psychologists as a form of intelligent behavior, there has been interest in how it is distributed among animal species. Although the mechanisms responsible for action imitation are not clear, we are now at least beginning to understand the conditions under which it occurs. In this article, I try to identify and differentiate the various forms of socially influenced behavior (species-typical social reactions, social effects on motivation, social effects on perception, socially influenced learning, and action imitation) and explain why it is important to differentiate imitation from other forms of social influence. I also examine some of the variables that appear to be involved in the occurrence of imitation. Finally, I speculate about why a number of bird species, but few mammal species, appear to imitate.
|
|
|
|
Cheney, D. L., Seyfarth, R. M., & Silk, J. B. (1995). The responses of female baboons (Papio cynocephalus ursinus) to anomalous social interactions: evidence for causal reasoning? J Comp Psychol, 109(2), 134–141.
Abstract: Baboons' (Papio cynocephalus ursinus) understanding of cause-effect relations in the context of social interactions was examined through use of a playback experiment. Under natural conditions, dominant female baboons often grunt to more subordinate mothers when interacting with their infants. Mothers occasionally respond to these grunts by uttering submissive fear barks. Subjects were played causally inconsistent call sequences in which a lower ranking female apparently grunted to a higher ranking female, and the higher ranking female apparently responded with fear barks. As a control, subjects heard a sequence made causally consistent by the inclusion of grunts from a 3rd female that was dominant to both of the others. Subjects responded significantly more strongly to the causally inconsistent sequences, suggesting that they recognized the factors that cause 1 individual to give submissive vocalizations to another.
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
Arnold, K., & Zuberbuhler, K. (2006). Language evolution: semantic combinations in primate calls. Nature, 441(7091), 303.
Abstract: Syntax sets human language apart from other natural communication systems, although its evolutionary origins are obscure. Here we show that free-ranging putty-nosed monkeys combine two vocalizations into different call sequences that are linked to specific external events, such as the presence of a predator and the imminent movement of the group. Our findings indicate that non-human primates can combine calls into higher-order sequences that have a particular meaning.
|
|
|
|
Peake, T. M., Terry, A. M. R., McGregor, P. K., & Dabelsteen, T. (2002). Do great tits assess rivals by combining direct experience with information gathered by eavesdropping? Proc Biol Sci, 269(1503), 1925–1929.
Abstract: Animals frequently use signals that travel further than the spacing between individuals. For every intended recipient of a given signal there are likely to be many other individuals that receive information. Eavesdropping on signalling interactions between other individuals provides a relatively cost-free method of assessing future opponents or mates. Male great tits (Parus major) extract relative information from such interactions between individuals unknown to them. Here, we show that male great tits can take information gathering a stage further and obtain more information about a previously unencountered intruder, by the hitherto unknown capability of combining information gathered by eavesdropping with that derived from their own direct interaction with an individual. Prior experience with an intruder (A) was achieved by subjecting a focal male to different levels of intrusion simulated using interactive playback. This intruder (A) then took part in a simulated interaction with an unknown male (B) outside the territorial boundary of the focal males. In response to subsequent intrusion by the second male (B), focal males showed low song output in response to males that had lost to a male that the subject was able to beat. Males of known high quality, or those about which information was ambiguous, elicited a high level of song output by focal males. We discuss the implications of this finding for the evolution of communication and social behaviour.
|
|
|
|
Dunbar, R. (2003). Evolution of the social brain. Science, 302(5648), 1160–1161.
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
