Abstract: Summary A wonderfully lucid framework for the ways to understand animal behaviour is that represented by the four [`]whys' proposed by Tinbergen (1963). For much of the past three decades, however, these four avenues have been pursued more or less in parallel. Functional questions, for example, have been addressed by behavioural ecologists, mechanistic questions by psychologists and ethologists, ontogenetic questions by developmental biologists and neuroscientists and phylogenetic questions by evolutionary biologists. More recently, the value of integration between these differing views has become apparent. In this brief review, we concentrate especially on current attempts to integrate mechanistic and functional approaches. Most of our understanding of learning and memory in animals comes from the psychological literature, which tends to use only rats or pigeons, and more occasionally primates, as subjects. The underlying psychological assumption is of general processes that are similar across species and contexts rather than a range of specific abilities. However, this does not seem to be entirely true as several learned behaviours have been described that are specific to particular species or contexts. The first conspicuous exception to the generalist assumption was the demonstration of long delay taste aversion learning in rats (Garcia et al., 1955), in which it was shown that a stimulus need not be temporally contiguous with a response for the animal to make an association between food and illness. Subsequently, a number of other examples, such as imprinting and song learning in birds (e.g., Bolhuis and Honey, 1998; Catchpole and Slater, 1995; Horn, 1998), have been thoroughly researched. Even in these cases, however, it has been typical for only a few species to be studied (domestic chicks provide the [`]model' imprinting species and canaries and zebra finches the song learning [`]models'). As a result, a great deal is understood about the neural underpinnings and development of the behaviour, but substantially less is understood about interspecific variation and whether variation in behaviour is correlated with variation in neural processing (see review by Tramontin and Brenowitz, 2000 but see ten Cate and Vos, 1999).

Abstract: Two measures are reported of the nature or quality of a mother-offspring (MO) relationship during development using brown capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) as models. One is a qualitative classification of MO relationships as secure, resistant, or avoidant attachments. The other is an empirical ratio of relative affiliation to agonism called the MO relationship quality, or MORQ, Index. The two methods tapped similar relationship features so relationships high or low of a median split of MORQ values were heuristically labeled secure (n = 22) or insecure (n = 16), respectively. A comparison revealed extensive behavioral differences between secure and insecure MO relationships and suggested MORQ provided an objective, continuous measure of attachment security.

Abstract: Human cooperation is an evolutionary puzzle. Unlike other creatures, people frequently cooperate with genetically unrelated strangers, often in large groups, with people they will never meet again, and when reputation gains are small or absent. These patterns of cooperation cannot be explained by the nepotistic motives associated with the evolutionary theory of kin selection and the selfish motives associated with signalling theory or the theory of reciprocal altruism. Here we show experimentally that the altruistic punishment of defectors is a key motive for the explanation of cooperation. Altruistic punishment means that individuals punish, although the punishment is costly for them and yields no material gain. We show that cooperation flourishes if altruistic punishment is possible, and breaks down if it is ruled out. The evidence indicates that negative emotions towards defectors are the proximate mechanism behind altruistic punishment. These results suggest that future study of the evolution of human cooperation should include a strong focus on explaining altruistic punishment.

Abstract: Learning is likely to be costly and thus subject to trade-off with other components of life history. An obvious prediction, therefore, is that investment in learning, and thus learning performance, will vary with individual life history strategy and the reproductive value of the learning outcome. We tested this idea in the context of social dominance in male laboratory mice, using a simple radial maze paradigm to compare the ability of high- and low-ranking male mice to track changing food location. We tested animals in randomly selected pairs before and after establishing aggressive rank relationships to distinguish intrinsic differences in learning ability from those attributable to acquiring high or low rank. There was no difference in learning between later dominants and subordinates prior to establishing rank relationships. After pairing, however, dominants showed a significantly greater percentage of correct responses, with the difference being greatest earlier in a sequence of trials. The percentage of correct responses also increased with the amount of aggression initiated during pairing. The results thus appeared to reflect a state-dependent change in learning associated with the aggressive social relationships formed during pairing.