Being honest about one's intentions: An evolutionary stable strategy for animal conflicts

Rhijn, Johan G. van; Vodegel, Ron

doi:10.1016/0022-5193(80)90261-1

Cited by 141 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In contrast, models of aggressive interactions typically focus on interactions between particular pairs of individuals and often use game theory; these models predict who will win the contest, or the pattern of behaviours within a contest (e.g. Parker 1974;van Rhijn & Vodegel 1980;Maynard Smith 1982;Enquist & Leimar 1983;Grafen 1987;Nuyts 1994;Mesterton-Gibbons et al 1996). Compared to the more spatially oriented territory models, models of animal contests tend to be more dynamic, and often investigate sequences of behaviours between individuals (e.g.…”

Section:  2001 the Association For The Study Of Animal Behaviourmentioning

confidence: 99%

When should a territory resident attack?

2001

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Models of territorial defence tend to omit two characteristics of many territorial systems: repeated intrusions by the same individual and the learning processes of residents and intruders. Here we present state-dependent, dynamic models of feeding territories, designed to investigate temporal patterns of resident aggression towards intruders that are capable of spatial learning. We compare two types of models: (1) a nomadic intruder model, in which intruders never visit the same territory twice, and (2) a single, repeat intruder model, in which an intruder may repeatedly intrude into a given territory but is less likely to do so after being attacked. These two models produce qualitatively and quantitatively different patterns of aggression by residents. For instance, residents with intruders that may repeatedly intrude have high initial attack rates, regardless of initial probability of intrusion, but their attack rates decline over time. In contrast, residents in the nomadic intruder model do not attack intruders if intrusion rates are moderately high, and their attack rates are constant and high for most of the period of territory tenure. In addition, residents of both nomadic and repeat intruder scenarios stopped attacking intruders for a short period before voluntarily abandoning their feeding territories. The results of our models suggest that repeated intrusions and learning processes have a dramatic effect on territorial defence.  2001 The Association for the Study of Animal BehaviourFor many years, models have played an important role in advancing our understanding of the role of aggression in territorial species. However, a dichotomy has arisen between models investigating territories and models investigating aggressive behaviour. Most territory models focus on an individual versus the rest of the population, and consider such questions as when space should be defended, how much space should be defended, or what shape a territory should be (e.g.

show abstract

Section:  2001 the Association For The Study Of Animal Behaviourmentioning

confidence: 99%

When should a territory resident attack?

2001

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Animals also use other cues to assess the strength of an opponent in conflict situations, for example, vocalizations in red deer and in toads [Clutton-Brock and Albon, 1979;Davies and Halliday, 1978], and the presence and size of weapons, in sheep and hermit crabs [Geist, 1966;Neil, 1985]. Animals' previous experience of fights with that opponent [Thouless and Guinness, 1986;van Rhijn and Vodegal, 1980], and the numbers of allies [Datta, 1983;de Waal, 1984], can also influence an animal's decision whether or not to fight a particular opponent.The principle that when in a conflict situation, cues indicating the likely fighting ability of the opponent will be assessed, and used to influence the decision whether to escalate the conflict or to withdraw from it, is one that, at an anecdotal level, seems to apply to humans. For example, notions of a fair fight, summed up by the phrase ''pick on someone your own size'', and formalized in the weight categories for boxing and wrestling, both indicate an intuitive sense of unfairness in physical fights where the protagonists are unmatched.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Physical aggression as a function of perceived fighting ability and provocation: an experimental investigation

Archer

Benson

2007

Aggressive Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In three studies, Resource Holding Power (RHP) and provocation were manipulated in scenarios involving a young person in a bar with friends. In Study 1, teenage men reported lower likelihood of responding with physical aggression when insulted as levels of three RHP cues (size, allies and reputation) increased, effects that were accentuated by combinations of high-RHP cues; in the second part of this study, they consistently rated an insult to their girlfriend as the most provoking from a range of possible provocations, chosen on theoretical and empirical grounds. Study 2 replicated the results of the first part of Study 1 in samples of men and women in their twenties, although the effects were weaker at low levels of RHP. Study 3 combined a high- or low-provoking event, with low, medium or high RHP, and a wider range of response choices. As expected, direct aggression increased as provocation increased and RHP decreased. Delayed aggressive responses, including revenge fantasies, were highest in response to high provocation and high RHP. Findings are discussed in relation to theoretical models of aggressive motivation.

show abstract

“…Theoretical work suggests that several types of complex social behaviour could select for the kind of variable markings necessary for individual recognition, including territoriality (Ydenberg et al 1988), reciprocal altruism (Crowley et al 1996), monogamous pairing (Dale et al 2001), dominance (Barnard & Burk 1979;Van Rhijn & Vodegel 1980;Dawkins & Guilford 1991) and reproductive transactions (when group members yield reproduction to each other in exchange for benefits in a manner predicted by transactional models). Examining the relationship between variability and social behaviour will also provide valuable insight into which behaviours actually select for distinctive, recognizable individuals, as little empirical research has addressed this topic (Beecher 1989).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Complex social behaviour can select for variability in visual features: a case study inPolisteswasps

Tibbetts

2004

Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ability to recognize individuals is common in animals; however, we know little about why the phenotypic variability necessary for individual recognition has evolved in some animals but not others. One possibility is that natural selection favours variability in some social contexts but not in others. Polistes fuscatus wasps have variable facial and abdominal markings used for individual recognition within their complex societies. Here, I explore whether social behaviour can select for variability by examining the relationship between social behaviour and variability in visual features (marking variability) across social wasp taxa. Analysis using a concentrated changes test demonstrates that marking variability is significantly associated with nesting strategy. Species with flexible nest-founding strategies have highly variable markings, whereas species without flexible nest-founding strategies have low marking variability. These results suggest that: (i) individual recognition may be widespread in the social wasps, and (ii) natural selection may play a role in the origin and maintenance of the variable distinctive markings. Theoretical and empirical evidence suggests that species with flexible nesting strategies have reproductive transactions, a type of complex social behaviour predicted to require individual recognition. Therefore, the reproductive transactions of flexible species may select for highly variable individuals who are easy to identify as individuals. Further, selection for distinctiveness may provide an alternative explanation for the evolution of phenotypic diversity.

show abstract

Being honest about one's intentions: An evolutionary stable strategy for animal conflicts

Cited by 141 publications

References 24 publications

When should a territory resident attack?

When should a territory resident attack?

Physical aggression as a function of perceived fighting ability and provocation: an experimental investigation

Complex social behaviour can select for variability in visual features: a case study inPolisteswasps

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About