Abstract: During the evolution of cooperation it may have become critical for individuals to compare their own efforts and pay-offs with those of others. Negative reactions may occur when expectations are violated. One theory proposes that aversion to inequity can explain human cooperation within the bounds of the rational choice model, and may in fact be more inclusive than previous explanations. Although there exists substantial cultural variation in its particulars, this 'sense of fairness' is probably a human universal that has been shown to prevail in a wide variety of circumstances. However, we are not the only cooperative animals, hence inequity aversion may not be uniquely human. Many highly cooperative nonhuman species seem guided by a set of expectations about the outcome of cooperation and the division of resources. Here we demonstrate that a nonhuman primate, the brown capuchin monkey (Cebus apella), responds negatively to unequal reward distribution in exchanges with a human experimenter. Monkeys refused to participate if they witnessed a conspecific obtain a more attractive reward for equal effort, an effect amplified if the partner received such a reward without any effort at all. These reactions support an early evolutionary origin of inequity aversion.

Abstract: Stable cooperation requires that each party's pay-offs exceed those available through individual action. The present experimental study on brown capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) investigated if decisions about cooperation are (a) guided by the amount of competition expected to follow the cooperation, and (b) made instantaneously or only after a period of familiarization. Pairs of adult monkeys were presented with a mutualistic cooperative task with variable opportunities for resource monopolization (clumped versus dispersed rewards), and partner relationships (kin versus nonkin). After pre-training, each pair of monkeys (N=11) was subjected to six tests, consisting of 15 2 min trials each, with rewards available to both parties. Clumped reward distribution had an immediate negative effect on cooperation: this effect was visible right from the start, and remained visible even if clumped trials alternated with dispersed trials. The drop in cooperation was far more dramatic for nonkin than kin, which was explained by the tendency of dominant nonkin to claim more than half of the rewards under the clumped condition. The immediacy of responses suggests a decision-making process based on predicted outcome of cooperation. Decisions about cooperation thus take into account both the opportunity for and the likelihood of subsequent competition over the spoils.

Abstract: The bidirectional control procedure was used to determine whether pigeons (Columba livia) would imitate a demonstrator that pushed a sliding screen for food. One group of observers saw a trained demonstrator push a sliding screen door with its beak (imitation group), whereas 2 other groups watched the screen move independently (possibly learning how the environment works) with a conspecific either present (affordance learning with social facilitation) or absent (affordance learning alone). A 4th group could not see the screen being pushed (sound and odor control). Imitation was evidenced by the finding that pigeons that saw a demonstrator push the screen made a higher proportion of matching screen pushes than observers in 2 appropriate control conditions. Further, observers that watched a screen move without a demonstrator present made a significantly higher proportion of matching screen pushes than would be expected by chance. Thus, these pigeons were capable of affordance learning.

Abstract: Forty Danish warmblood colts in two replicates were used to investigate the effect of housing and handling in the rearing period on the reactions to humans. The horses entered the experiment after weaning and were housed either individually (n=16) or in groups of three (n=24). Half of the horses from each housing group were handled three times per week for a period of 10 min. Approach tests were performed in the home environment when the horses were 6, 9, 12, 18, 21, and 24 months old, and an Arena and Human Encounter test was performed in a novel environment when the horses were 12 and 24 months old, respectively. In the home environment, single-housed horses approached sooner and were more easily approached by a human than group-housed horses where no effect of handling was observed. Horses approached sooner and were more easily approached with increasing age. In the Arena and Human Encounter test, single-housed horses expressed less restless behaviour, more explorative behaviour, and less vocalisation than group-housed horses. Handled horses showed lower increase in heart rate during the test than non-handled horses. There was no difference between the number of times single or group-housed horses touched an unfamiliar person in the Arena and Human Encounter test but handled horses approached sooner than non-handled horses. It is concluded that the social environment affected the way horses reacted to humans when tested in the home environment but not in a novel environment. In contrast, handling affected the reactions to humans when tested in the novel environment but not in the home environment. However, handled horses also reacted less to the novel environment in general, thus indicating that handling is a mean of avoiding potential dangerous situations.

Abstract: We performed two experiments in which we allowed a male fighting fish, Betta splendens, designated a bystander, to observe aggressive contests between pairs of male conspecifics. Another male (naive male) observed an empty tank or two nonaggressive males, depending on the experiment. Immediately after these observation periods, we allowed the bystander and naive male to interact in a neutral area. In both experiments, bystander males were dominant over naive males in a significant number of the encounters. Bystander males performed significantly more aggressive behaviours (displays, chases and bites) than did naive males. Differences in dominance were not due to chance differences in body size. These findings demonstrate that exposure to aggression between conspecifics increases aggressive motivation in bystander male fighting fish. We discuss briefly the implications of such social experience on the formation of dominance hierarchies. Copyright 2003 Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour.