| Home | << 1 2 3 4 >> |
|
Massen, J., Sterck, E., & de Vos, H. (2010). Close social associations in animals and humans: functions and mechanisms of friendship (Vol. 147).
Abstract: Both humans and group-living animals associate and behave affiliatively more with some individuals than others. Human friendship has long been acknowledged, and recently scientists studying animal behaviour have started using the term friendship for close social associates in animals. Yet, while biologists describe friends as social tools to enhance fitness, social scientists describe human friendship as unconditional. We investigate whether these different descriptions reflect true differences in human friendship and animal close social associations or are a by-product of different research approaches: namely social scientists focussing on proximate and biologists on ultimate explanations. We first stress the importance of similar measures to determine close social associations, thereafter examine their ultimate benefits and proximate motivations, and discuss the latest findings on the central-neural regulation of social bonds. We conclude that both human friendship and animal close social associations are ultimately beneficial. On the proximate level, motivations for friendship in humans and for close social associations in animals are not necessarily based on benefits and are often unconditional. Moreover, humans share with many animals a similar physiological basis of sociality. Therefore, biologists and social scientist describe the same phenomenon, and the use of the term friendship for animals seems justified.
|
|
Goursot, C., Düpjan, S., Puppe, B., & Leliveld, L. M. C. (2021). Affective styles and emotional lateralization: A promising framework for animal welfare research. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 237, 105279.
Abstract: The growing recognition of animals as individuals has broader implications for farm animal welfare research. Even under highly standardized on-farm conditions, farm animals show heterogeneous but individually consistent behavioural patterns towards various stimuli, based on how they appraise these stimuli. As a result, animal welfare is likely to be highly individual as well, and studying the proximate mechanisms underlying distinct individual behaviour patterns and appraisal will improve animal welfare research. We propose to extend the framework of affective styles to bridge the gap between existing research fields on animal personality and affective states. Affective styles refer to consistent individual differences in emotional reactivity and regulation and can be predicted by baseline cerebral lateralization. Likewise, animals with consistent left or right motor biases--a proxy measure of individual patterns in cerebral lateralization--have been shown to differ in their personality, emotional reactivity, motivational tendencies or coping styles. In this paper, we present the current knowledge of the links between laterality and stable individual traits in behaviour and affect in light of hypotheses on emotional lateralization. Within our suggested framework, we make recommendations on how to investigate affective styles in non-human animals and give practical examples. This approach has the potential to promote a science of affective styles in nonhuman animals and significantly advance research on animal welfare.
|
|
Miller, G. (2006). Animal behavior. Signs of empathy seen in mice. Science, 312(5782), 1860–1861.
|
|
Shettleworth, S. J. (1985). Foraging, memory, and constraints on learning. Ann N Y Acad Sci, 443, 216–226.
|