Reddon, A. R., & Hurd, P. L. (2009). Acting unilaterally: Why do animals with strongly lateralized brains behave differently than those with weakly lateralized brains? Bioscience Hypotheses, 2(6), 383–387.
Abstract: Cerebral lateralization was once thought to be unique to humans, but is now known to be widespread among the vertebrates. Lateralization appears to confer cognitive advantages upon those that possess it. Despite the taxonomic ubiquity and described advantages of lateralization, substantial individual variation exists in all species. Individual variation in cerebral lateralization may be tied to individual variation in behaviour and the selective forces that act to maintain variation in behaviour may also act to maintain variation in lateralization. The mechanisms linking individual variation in the strength of cerebral lateralization to individual variation in behaviour remain obscure. We propose here a general hypothesis which may help to explain this link. We suggest that individuals with strong and weak lateralizations behave differently because of differences in the ability of one hemisphere to inhibit the functions of the other in each type of brain organization. We also suggest a specific mechanism involving the asymmetric epithalamic nucleus, the habenula. We conclude by discussing some predictions and potential tests of our hypothesis.
|
Lilienfeld, S. O., Gershon, J., Duke, M., Marino, L., & de Waal, F. B. (1999). A preliminary investigation of the construct of psychopathic personality (psychopathy) in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). J Comp Psychol, 113(4), 365–375.
Abstract: Although the construct of psychopathy has received considerable attention in humans, its relevance to other animals is largely unknown. We developed a measure of psychopathy for use in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes), the Chimpanzee Psychopathy Measure (CPM), and asked 6 raters to complete this index on 34 chimpanzees. The CPM (a) demonstrated satisfactory interrater reliability and internal consistency; (b) exhibited marginally significant sex differences (males > females); (c) correlated positively with measures of extraversion, agreeableness, and observational ratings of agonism, sexual activity, daring behaviors, teasing, silent bluff displays, and temper tantrums, and negatively with observational ratings of generosity; and (d) demonstrated incremental validity above and beyond a measure of dominance. Although further validation of the CPM is needed, these findings suggest that the psychopathy construct may be relevant to chimpanzees.
|
Amici, F., Widdig, A., Lehmann, J., & Majolo, B. (2019). A meta-analysis of interindividual differences in innovation. Anim. Behav., 155, 257–268.
Abstract: The ability to innovate and the social transmission of innovations have played a central role in human evolution. However, innovation is also crucial for other animals, by allowing them to cope with novel socioecological challenges. Although innovation plays such a central role in animals' lives, we still do not know the conditions required for innovative behaviour to emerge. Here, we focused on interindividual differences in innovation by (1) extensively reviewing existing literature on innovative behaviour in animals and (2) quantitatively testing the different evolutionary hypotheses that have been proposed to explain interindividual variation in innovation propensity during foraging tasks. We ran a series of phylogenetically controlled mixed-effects meta-regression models to determine which hypotheses (if any) are supported by currently available empirical studies. Our analyses show that innovation is more common in individuals that are older and belong to the larger sex, but also in more neophilic and/or explorative individuals. Moreover, these effects change depending on the study setting (i.e. wild versus captive). Our results provide no clear support to the excess of energy or the bad competitor hypotheses and suggest that study setting and interindividual differences in traits related to personality are also important predictors of innovation.
|
