Abstract: Homo sapiensis increasingly being studied within the evolutionary (adaptationist, selectionist) framework favoured by animal behaviour researchers. There are various labels for such work, including evolutionary psychology, human behavioural ecology and human sociobiology. Collectively, we call these areas `human evolutionary psychology' (HEP) because their shared objective is an evolutionary understanding of human information processing and decision making. Sexual selection and sex differences have been especially prominent in recent HEP research, but many other topics have been addressed, including parent-offspring relations, reciprocity and exploitation, foraging strategies and spatial cognition. Many HEP researchers began their scientific careers in animal behaviour, and in many ways, HEP research is scarcely distinguishable from other animal behaviour research. Currently controversial issues in HEP, such as the explanation(s) for observed levels of heritable diversity, the kinds of data needed to test adaptationist hypotheses, and the characterization of a species-typical `environment of evolutionary adaptedness', are issues in animal behaviour as well. What gives HEP a distinct methodological flavour is that the research animal can talk, an ability that has both advantages and pitfalls for researchers. The proper use of self-reports and other verbal data in HEP might usefully become a subject of future research in its own right.

Abstract: In studies on mammalian parental investment, time spent suckling is often used as a predictor of the milk transferred from mother to infant. It is assumed that the rate of milk transfer is positively correlated with the time spent suckling. However, this assumption has not been tested and empirical studies show conflicting results. Nevertheless, in species in which suckling can readily be observed, time spent suckling is still used to measure milk transfer, although an increasing number of workers recognize that the measure is potentially inaccurate. A meta-analysis on studies that have correlated measures of time spent suckling with milk intake estimates based on weight gain revealed a weak positive relationship and significant heterogeneity between studies. Isotope-labelling techniques for the measurement of milk transfer independent of behaviour have been in use since the 1970s, particularly in studies of species in which suckling is difficult to observe. Only one study has attempted to correlate behavioural measures with independent isotope measures, and it found no relationship between the two measures. I suggest that researchers have avoided such a test as it is unlikely that a strong relationship will be found between milk transfer and suckling behaviour, and I discuss the various factors that confound the relationship and contribute to high heterogeneity between studies. Consequently, the assumption that milk transfer can be measured by time spent suckling has inadequate empirical foundation, and needs to be tested using isotope-labelling methods. Copyright 1998 The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour

Abstract: The costs associated with initial conflicts could be reduced if animals can assess the fighting ability of possible future opponents by watching their contest success against other individuals. We tested this hypothesis by conducting repeated dyadic dominance trials on size-matched juvenile rainbow trout,Oncorhynchus mykiss. In the first trial a dyadic contest was `observed' by a single fish separated by a transparent divider. In the second trial, the observer was paired against either the `familiar' dominant fish or an unfamiliar dominant fish from the first trial. We predicted that observers should settle conflicts with previewed opponents faster and with less aggression than those with unfamiliar fish. This prediction was supported for observers that lost against a previewed competitor, since these fish reduced their aggression more rapidly than did unfamiliar observers. Familiar observers that won, however, showed a more rapid increase in aggression compared with unfamiliar winning observers. This suggests that, regardless of whether an observer challenges the initial dominant, this `decision' is taken more rapidly in conflicts with preassessed contestants, because of the a priori information about their fighting ability. Since preassessment could save energy and allow effort to be concentrated on contests with a high payoff/probability of winning, selection may favour preview strategies when contest competition over resources is important for fitness.

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.