Abstract: The communication of aggressive motivation or fighting ability has important fitness consequences for competing animals. Selection should favour rapid and honest communication between opponents to settle dominance relationships while avoiding prolonged and intense fighting. We investigated factors that influence fighting strategies and contest outcomes in female house finches, Carpodacus mexicanus, specifically focusing on the following questions. (1) What social contexts trigger an aggressive response? (2) Does body size and condition contribute to female fighting ability? (3) Do contextual factors, such as mate presence, nest status, nest proximity, and site experience contribute to fighting motivation? (4) Does contest intensity and duration increase as the differences in fighting ability between opponents decrease? (5) What is the relative contribution of fighting ability and aggressive motivation to the outcome of a contest? We found that aggression was triggered most frequently by female intrusions in the vicinity of nest and by extrapair female intrusions on an established pair. Female fighting and contest outcomes were strongly influenced by body condition and body size, and females were more motivated to initiate fights and won more contests when their mates were present. Females at the later breeding stages and those fighting closer to their nests were dominant and won more fights compared to females at earlier breeding stages or further from their nests. Females initiated a greater proportion of contests against opponents with similar local familiarity and breeding history. Escalated and prolonged contests, while rare, occurred exclusively between females of the most similar body size and condition. When differences in body condition between opponents are not easily perceived, contestants might escalate contests for more reliable assessments of relative fighting ability. Finally, body condition was not a strong determinant of contest outcome in the contexts with easily assessed differences in the resource value (e.g. mate presence), but without these motivational differences, body condition was the ultimate determinant of contest outcomes.

Abstract: Humans are capable of making inferences about other individuals' intentions and goals by evaluating their actions in relation to the constraints imposed by the environment. This capacity enables humans to go beyond the surface appearance of behavior to draw inferences about an individual's mental states. Presently unclear is whether this capacity is uniquely human or is shared with other animals. We show that cotton-top tamarins, rhesus macaques, and chimpanzees all make spontaneous inferences about a human experimenter's goal by attending to the environmental constraints that guide rational action. These findings rule out simple associative accounts of action perception and show that our capacity to infer rational, goal-directed action likely arose at least as far back as the New World monkeys, some 40 million years ago.

Abstract: Humans have many cognitive skills not possessed by their nearest primate relatives. The cultural intelligence hypothesis argues that this is mainly due to a species-specific set of social-cognitive skills, emerging early in ontogeny, for participating and exchanging knowledge in cultural groups. We tested this hypothesis by giving a comprehensive battery of cognitive tests to large numbers of two of humans' closest primate relatives, chimpanzees and orangutans, as well as to 2.5-year-old human children before literacy and schooling. Supporting the cultural intelligence hypothesis and contradicting the hypothesis that humans simply have more “general intelligence,” we found that the children and chimpanzees had very similar cognitive skills for dealing with the physical world but that the children had more sophisticated cognitive skills than either of the ape species for dealing with the social world.

Abstract: There is much interest in the evolutionary forces that favored the evolution of large brains in the primate order. The social brain hypothesis posits that selection has favored larger brains and more complex cognitive capacities as a means to cope with the challenges of social life. The hypothesis is supported by evidence that shows that group size is linked to various measures of brain size. But it has not been clear how cognitive complexity confers fitness advantages on individuals. Research in the field and laboratory shows that sophisticated social cognition underlies social behavior in primate groups. Moreover, a growing body of evidence suggests that the quality of social relationships has measurable fitness consequences for individuals.