Assessments of fighting ability need not be cognitively complex

Fawcett, Tim W.; Mowles, Sophie L.

doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2013.05.033

Cited by 50 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Elwood and Arnott (2012) and Fawcett and Mowles (2013) This study investigated the assessment strategy used to resolve conflict in male giant 110 Australian cuttlefish, Sepia apama. These cuttlefish engage in dynamic signalling during 111 agonistic contests, similar to other species in which game theory models have been tested 112 (e.g.…”

Section: Assessment 41mentioning

confidence: 99%

Giant Australian cuttlefish use mutual assessment to resolve male-male contests

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Assessment 41mentioning

confidence: 99%

Giant Australian cuttlefish use mutual assessment to resolve male-male contests

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…a trait and/or a behaviour) within a contest to determine whether they should continue the contest over a resource. Even though assessment strategies should vary depending on context ( [7][8][9], e.g. [11]), the most common form of assessment in non-human animals is self-assessment, with relatively fewer examples of opponent and relative assessment [5,8,48].…”

Section: Contests In Humans Versus Other Animals (A) Similar Reasons mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Much of this discussion revolves around the extent to which animals vary their strategies (e.g. [11]) and engage in more complex comparative decision-making [7][8][9]. Being able to determine exactly how individuals use information to make contest-dependent, fitness-relevant decisions would provide valuable insight into both the evolution of various traits and strategies, as well as the selective pressures that are necessary for competitive decision-making to evolve.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Or do animals make even more complex decisions during contests, by both assessing their opponent and comparing this assessment with what they know about their own current fighting ability (mutual assessment models; [6])? Understanding which assessment strategies animals use, whether they modify their assessment strategies in different contexts, and the factors individuals use to make decisions within contests are some of the most-discussed questions in the contest literature [5,[7][8][9][10]. Much of this discussion revolves around the extent to which animals vary their strategies (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Using knowledge from human research to improve understanding of contest theory and contest dynamics

Kasumovic

Denson

2017

Proc. R. Soc. B.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Our understanding of animal contests and the factors that affect contest dynamics and decisions stems from a long and prosperous collaboration between empiricists and theoreticians. Over the last two decades, however, theoretical predictions regarding the factors that affect individual decisions before, during and after a contest are becoming increasingly difficult to test empirically. Extremely large sample sizes are necessary to experimentally test the nuanced theoretical assumptions surrounding how information is used by animals during a contest, how context changes the information used, and how individuals change behaviour as a result of both the information available and the context in which the information is acquired. In this review, we discuss how the investigation of contests in humans through the collaboration of biologists and psychologists may advance contest theory and dynamics in general. We argue that a long and productive history exploring human behaviour and psychology combined with technological advancements provide a unique opportunity to manipulate human perception during contests and collect unbiased data, allowing more targeted examinations of particular aspects of contest theory (e.g. winner/loser effects, information use as a function of age). We hope that our perspective provides the impetus for many future collaborations between biologists and psychologists.

show abstract

“…For example, in animal contests, an individual is commonly expected to engage in conflict only if there is a reasonable chance of success. Assessment of opponents may require complex cognitive abilities, but some researchers have proposed simpler processes (Elwood & Arnott, 2012;Fawcett & Mowles, 2013).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%