| |
Records |
Links |
|
Author |
Massen, J.; Sterck, E.; de Vos, H. |
|
| |
Title |
Close social associations in animals and humans: functions and mechanisms of friendship |
Type |
|
| |
Year |
2010 |
Publication |
Behaviour |
Abbreviated Journal |
|
|
| |
Volume |
147 |
Issue |
11 |
Pages |
1379 |
|
| |
Keywords |
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. |
|
| |
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. |
|
| |
Address |
|
|
| |
Corporate Author |
|
Thesis |
|
|
| |
Publisher |
|
Place of Publication |
|
Editor |
|
|
| |
Language |
|
Summary Language |
|
Original Title |
|
|
| |
Series Editor |
|
Series Title |
|
Abbreviated Series Title |
|
|
| |
Series Volume |
|
Series Issue |
|
Edition |
|
|
| |
ISSN |
|
ISBN |
|
Medium |
|
|
| |
Area |
|
Expedition |
|
Conference |
|
|
| |
Notes |
|
Approved |
no |
|
| |
Call Number  |
Equine Behaviour @ team @ |
Serial |
5813 |
|
| Permanent link to this record |
| |
|
| |
|
Author |
Beery, A.K.; Kaufer, D. |
|
| |
Title |
Stress, social behavior, and resilience: Insights from rodents |
Type |
Journal Article |
| |
Year |
2015 |
Publication |
Neurobiology of Stress |
Abbreviated Journal |
Neurobiol. Stress |
|
| |
Volume |
1 |
Issue |
Stress Resilience |
Pages |
116-127 |
|
| |
Keywords |
Stress; Anxiety; Social behavior; Sociality; Social stress; Social buffering |
|
| |
Abstract |
The neurobiology of stress and the neurobiology of social behavior are deeply intertwined. The social environment interacts with stress on almost every front: social interactions can be potent stressors; they can buffer the response to an external stressor; and social behavior often changes in response to stressful life experience. This review explores mechanistic and behavioral links between stress, anxiety, resilience, and social behavior in rodents, with particular attention to different social contexts. We consider variation between several different rodent species and make connections to research on humans and non-human primates. |
|
| |
Address |
|
|
| |
Corporate Author |
|
Thesis |
|
|
| |
Publisher |
|
Place of Publication |
|
Editor |
|
|
| |
Language |
|
Summary Language |
|
Original Title |
|
|
| |
Series Editor |
|
Series Title |
|
Abbreviated Series Title |
|
|
| |
Series Volume |
|
Series Issue |
|
Edition |
|
|
| |
ISSN |
2352-2895 |
ISBN |
|
Medium |
|
|
| |
Area |
|
Expedition |
|
Conference |
|
|
| |
Notes |
|
Approved |
no |
|
| |
Call Number |
Equine Behaviour @ team @ |
Serial |
6413 |
|
| Permanent link to this record |
| |
|
| |
|
Author |
Levin, L.E. |
|
| |
Title |
Passage order through different pathways in groups of schooling fish, and the diversified leadership hypothesis |
Type |
Journal Article |
| |
Year |
1996 |
Publication |
Behavioural Processes |
Abbreviated Journal |
Behav. Process. |
|
| |
Volume |
37 |
Issue |
1 |
Pages |
1-8 |
|
| |
Keywords |
Animal sociality; Inter-individual variability; Aggregation-dispersion; Group problem solving |
|
| |
Abstract |
The diversified leadership hypothesis proposes that different individuals within a school of fish act as leaders in different circumstances. This `circumstantial leadership' results from inter-individual behavioral variability and a `cohesion-dispersion' tendency modulated by `failure-success' contingencies. The hypothesis predicts that when offered different pathways to escape the restriction of their swimming space, individuals within a group of fish will show 1. (a) consistent passage orders in each pathway, but2. (b) different passage orders in different pathways. Using an avoidance paddle and three different groups of fish (Aphyocharax erithrurus) the results confirmed prediction 1. (a) while prediction2. (b) was verified only in one group. |
|
| |
Address |
|
|
| |
Corporate Author |
|
Thesis |
|
|
| |
Publisher |
|
Place of Publication |
|
Editor |
|
|
| |
Language |
|
Summary Language |
|
Original Title |
|
|
| |
Series Editor |
|
Series Title |
|
Abbreviated Series Title |
|
|
| |
Series Volume |
|
Series Issue |
|
Edition |
|
|
| |
ISSN |
|
ISBN |
|
Medium |
|
|
| |
Area |
|
Expedition |
|
Conference |
|
|
| |
Notes |
|
Approved |
no |
|
| |
Call Number |
Equine Behaviour @ team @ room B 3.029 |
Serial |
2069 |
|
| Permanent link to this record |
