Abstract: ahavi's handicap principle,originally proposed as an explanation for sexual selection ofelaborate male traits, suggests that a sufficient cost to dishonest signals can outweigh the rewards of deception and allow individuals to communicate honestly. Maynard Smith (1991) and Johnstone and Grafen (1992) introduce the Sir Philip Sidney game in order to extend the handicap principle to interactions among related individuals, and to demonstrate that stable costly signalling systems can exist among relatives.
In this paper we demonstrate that despite the benefits associated with honest information transfer, the costs incurred in a stable costly signalling system may leave all participants worse off than they would be in a system with no signalling at all. In both the discrete and continuous forms of the Sir Philip Sidney game, there exist conditions under which costly signalling among relatives, while stable, is so costly that it is disadvantageous compared with no signalling at all. We determine the factors which dictate signal cost and signal benefit in a generalized version of this game, and explain how signal cost can exceed signal value. Such results raise concerns about theevolutionary pathways which could have led to the existence of signalling equilibria in nature. The paper stresses the importance of comparing signalling equilibria with other possible strategies, beforedrawing conclusions regarding the optimality of signalling.

Abstract: The Sir Philip Sidney game has been used by numerous authors to show how signal cost can facilitate honest signaling among relatives. Here, we demonstrate that, in this game, honest cost-free signals are possible as well, under very general conditions. Moreover, these cost-free signals are better for all participants than the previously explored alternatives. Recent empirical evidence suggests that begging is energetically inexpensive for nestling birds; this finding led some researchers to question the applicability of the costly signaling framework to nestling begging. Our results show that cost-free or inexpensive signals, as observed empirically, fall within the framework of signaling theory.

Abstract: Fourteen riding horses of mixed age and breed were randomly allocated to observer and control treatments. An additional horse was pre-trained as a demonstrator to walk the 13.8 m length of the test arena and select one of two food buckets using colour and pattern cues. Observer horses were exposed to correct performances of the task by the trained demonstrator, for 20 trials held over 2 days. Control horses were subjected to the same handling and placement procedures as the observer horses but without exposure to the behaviour of the demonstrator. The third day for all subjects was designated as a test day. Each subject was released individually in a predetermined place in the arena, and the latency to walk the length of the test arena to the food buckets, the latency to feed, the identity of the bucket approached and the identity of the bucket selected were recorded on ten consecutive trials. During tests both food buckets contained food to minimize the possibility of individual trial and error learning. On the first trial the mean latency to approach the goal area was 18 s for observer horses, compared with 119 s for control horses (t = 2.8, d.f. = 12, P < 0.01) and the mean latency to eat was 35 s for observer horses, compared with 181 s for control horses (t = 4.86, d.f. = 11, P < 0.001). However, observer horses were no more likely to choose the demonstrated bucket than control horses on the first trial. Twelve of the 14 horses decreased their latency to approach the goal area during the series of ten trials, but there were no significant changes in the buckets selected.

Abstract: We investigated the interaction between individual experience and social learning in domestic dogs,Canis familiaris . We conducted two experiments using detour tests, where an object or food was placed behind a transparent, V-shaped wire-mesh fence, such that the dogs could get the reward by going around the fence. In some groups, two open doors were offered as an alternative, easier way to reach the reward. In experiment 1 we opened the doors only in trial 1, then closed them for trials 2 and 3. In experiment 2 other dogs were first taught to detour the fence with closed doors after they had observed a detouring human demonstrator, then we opened the doors for three subsequent trials. In experiment 1 all dogs reached the reward by going through the doors in trial 1, but their detouring performance was poor after the doors had been closed, if they had to solve the task on their own. However, dogs in the experimental group that were allowed to watch a detouring human demonstrator after the doors had been closed showed improved detouring ability compared with those that did not receive a demonstration of detouring. In experiment 2 the dogs tended to keep on detouring along the fence even if the doors had been opened, giving up a chance to get behind the fence by a shorter route. These results show that dogs can use information gained by observing a human demonstrator to overcome their own mistakenly preferred solution in a problem situation. In a reversed situation social learning can also contribute to a preference for a less adaptive behaviour. However, only repeated individual and social experience leads to a durable manifestation of maladaptive behaviour. Copyright 2003 Published by Elsevier Science Ltd on behalf of The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour.

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.