Common marmosets (Callithrix jacchus) evaluate third-party social interactions of human actors but Japanese monkeys (Macaca fuscata) do not.

Abstract

Reciprocity and cooperation are fundamental to human society and are observed in nonhuman primates. Primates are not only sensitive to direct reciprocity and its violation but also indirect reciprocity. Recent studies demonstrated that some primate species adjusted their behavior by observing others' interactions. Capuchin, marmoset, and squirrel monkeys avoided taking food from human actors who behaved nonreciprocally; however, no such empirical evidence among Old World monkeys is available. Here, we show that common marmosets, which are a highly prosocial species, discriminated between human actors who reciprocated in social exchanges and those who did not; however, Japanese monkeys, who are renowned for despotic social relationships, did not. In the reciprocal condition, 2 human actors exchanged food equally, whereas in the nonreciprocal condition, 1 actor (nonreciprocator) ended up with all the food and the other actor with none. The common marmosets avoided receiving food from the nonreciprocator in the nonreciprocal condition. Nevertheless, the Japanese monkeys did not show differential preferences in either condition. These results suggest a crucial role for prosocial tendencies in monkeys' responses to asymmetric exchanges and indicate that third-party social evaluations are not homologous among primates. Further comparative studies with direct comparisons will be required to explore the underlying mechanism of third-party social evaluations.

Do marmosets understand others’ conversations? A thermography approach

“…Together, this suggests that a preference for cooperative individuals is rather general in marmosets, but its behavioral expression is very context specific and sensitive to the costs that are involved with it. Such a general sensitivity may also explain why marmosets socially evaluate even nonconspecifics, namely, humans (22,23).…”

“…Common marmosets are cooperative breeders and have been reported to socially evaluate humans with the prevalent paradigm used to test for social evaluation (22,23). They live in a social system with extended reliance on allomaternal care, and being able to distinguish between potential cooperation partners is of high importance.…”

The psychological foundations of reputation-based cooperation

“…Some evidence suggests that children begin to evaluate others on the basis of their prosociality from a very young age (reviewed in Van de Vondervoort & Hamlin, 2008 but see Salvadori et al, 2015 for failed replication efforts). Evidence also exists in nonhuman apes and other primates to suggest that individuals are able to evaluate and choose interaction partners on the basis of observed prosociality (Herrmann et al, 2013, Russell et al, 2008, Subiaul et al, 2008, Kawai et al, 2019, but see Bueno-Guerra et al, 2020.…”

Theory of Mind in Nonhuman Primates

“…Both capuchin monkeys and Tonkean macaques (Macaca tokeana) also distinguish whether an experimenter intends to give them food but is unable to or is simply unwilling to Phillips et al, 2009). Monkeys are also able to differentiate helping versus hindering agents, and whether the actions of others are intentional or accidental Brügger et al, 2021;Costes-Thiré et al, 2015;Kawai et al, 2014Kawai et al, , 2019Wood et al, 2007). In addition, violation-of-expectation paradigms have further clarified marmosets' (Callithrix jacchus) and rhesus macaques' (Macaca mulatta) sensitivity to others' goals.…”

“…Copy goal-directed actions Schnoell & Fichtel, 2012J. Burkart et al, 2012Voelkl & Huber, 2000 Van de Waal et al, 2015;Van de Waal & Whiten, 2012Buttelmann et al, 2007Horner & Whiten, 2005Gergely et al, 2002 Rationally imitate Buttelmann et al, 2007;Horner & Whiten, 2005Gergely et al, 2002Carpenter et al, 2005Carpenter et al, 2005Gergely et al, 2002 Differentiate others' intentional versus accidental actions Wood et al, 2007Wood et al, 2007; but see Costes-Thiré et al, 2015; but see Povinelli et al, 1998Carpenter et al, 1998;Olineck & Poulin-Dubois, 2005 Differentiate unwilling versus unable others Phillips et al, 2009; but see: Drayton et al, 2016Buttelmann et al, 2012Call et al, 2004Behne et al, 2005 Differentiate helping versus hindering agents Brügger et al, 2021;Kawai et al, 2014Kawai et al, 2019Herrmann et al, 2013Russell et al, 2008;Subiaul et al, 2008Hamlin et al, 2007 Sensitivity to others' perception Follow others' gaze Ruiz et al, 2009;Sandel et al, 2011;Shepherd & Platt, 2007; but see…”