Abstract: A group of animals can only move cohesively, if group members “somehow” reach a consensus about the timing (e.g., start) and the spatial direction/destination of the collective movement. Timing and spatial decisions usually differ with respect to the continuity of their cost/benefit distribution in such a way that, in principle, compromises are much more feasible in timing decision (e.g. median preferred time) than they are in spatial decisions. The consequence is that consensus costs connected to collective timing decisions are usually less skewed amongst group members than are consensus costs connected to spatial decisions. This, in turn, influences the evolution of decision sharing: sharing in timing decisions is most likely to evolve when conflicts are high relative to group cohesion benefits, while sharing in spatial decisions is most likely to evolve in the opposite situation. We discuss the implications of these differences for the study of collective movement decisions.

Abstract: This paper reviews the literature on leadership in vertebrate groups, including recent work on human groups, before presenting the results of three new experiments looking at leadership and decision making in small and large human groups. In experiment 1, we find that both group size and the presence of uninformed individuals can affect the speed with which small human groups (eight people) decide between two opposing directional preferences and the likelihood of the group splitting. In experiment 2, we show that the spatial positioning of informed individuals within small human groups (10 people) can affect the speed and accuracy of group motion. We find that having a mixture of leaders positioned in the centre and on the edge of a group increases the speed and accuracy with which the group reaches their target. In experiment 3, we use large human crowds (100 and 200 people) to demonstrate that the trends observed from earlier work using small human groups can be applied to larger crowds. We find that only a small minority of informed individuals is needed to guide a large uninformed group. These studies build upon important theoretical and empirical work on leadership and decision making in animal groups.

Abstract: In animal groups, collective movements emerge from individual interactions. Biologists seek to identify how characteristics of actors in these groups, and their relationships, influence the decision-making process. We distinguished two basic factors determining leadership in group choices: identity and state. We hypothesized that identity is more important to leadership in groups with stable relationships, which permit the development of habitual roles. In groups with fluid membership, particular individuals or subgroups are less likely to emerge as consistent leaders. Instead, we predicted that movement initiation in unstable groups depends on individual state at the time of the decision. We characterized how identity and reproductive state influenced leadership patterns in the movements of plains zebra. As in many other mammals, lactation in this species significantly alters water and energy needs. We investigated leadership in tightly knit harems and loosely bonded herds of multiple harems. Harem females tended to have habitual roles in the initiation of harem movement. In herds, however, we found no consistent leaders among harems. At both levels of social organization, lactation was a key determinant of leadership. In harems, lactating females were more likely to initiate movement than nonlactating females. In turn, harems containing lactating females were more likely to lead herd movements. Thus, we conclude that social relationships and reproductive state together shape the interactions that produce group behaviours. One benefit to lactating females of leading herd movements is preferential access to scarce water. Thus, leadership roles in group decisions may have fitness consequences.

Abstract: In primate groups, collective movements are typically described as processes dependent on leadership mechanisms. However, in some species, decision-making includes negotiations and distributed leadership. These facts suggest that simple underlying processes may explain certain decision mechanisms during collective movements. To study such processes, we have designed experiments on white-faced capuchin monkeys (Cebus capucinus) during which we provoked collective movements involving a binary choice. These experiments enabled us to analyse the spatial decisions of individuals in the group. We found that the underlying process includes anonymous mimetism, which means that each individual may influence all members of the group. To support this result, we created a mathematical model issued from our experimental data. A totally anonymous model does not fit perfectly with our experimental distribution. A more individualised model, which takes into account the specific behaviour of social peripheral individuals, revealed the validity of the mimetism hypothesis. Even though white-faced capuchins have complex cognitive abilities, a coexistence of anonymous and social mechanisms appears to influence their choice of direction during collective movements. The present approach may offer vital insights into the relationships between individual behaviours and their emergent collective acts.

Abstract: Group-living animals have to make trade-offs to reach consensus and travel together. We investigated the recruitment processes underpinning decision-making at departure in a group of 20 female domestic geese (Anser domesticus) kept in semi-free-range conditions. Two observers continuously videotaped the behaviours of the birds. Data were analyzed using multiple regression analyses. We found that decision-making was a continuous and distributed process. Departure was preceded by an increase in the arousal state of group members and their initial orientation influenced recruitment. Patterns of group movement could be predicted from the behaviours of individuals before departure. Individuals' locations, moves and signals could act as passive or communicative cues. A higher number of vocalisations and arousal behaviours led to a larger number of individuals recruited. Some individuals were more efficient than others in recruiting followers but any geese could initiate a movement. First movers recruited a higher number of mates when they had a greater number of neighbours. Not only the first mover but also the behaviours of the second and third movers prompted further individuals to follow. There was no evidence that geese were able to intentionally recruit others, rather they synchronized and adjusted each other's motives until reaching a consensus.