Communication as a fundamental part of machiavellian intelligence.

Abstract

The Machiavellian intelligence hypothesis proposes that individuals in complex social groups require sophisticated social cognition. This hypothesis has advanced our understanding of the complex social lives of animals and how individuals interact with others in their groups. Machiavellian intelligence is the capacity of an individual to alter the behavior of others around it to the individual’s own advantage. This capacity is typically facilitated by complex communicative systems, social systems, and cognitive abilities. Curiously, communication among group members has not traditionally been a focus of research related to the Machiavellian intelligence hypothesis. Here, we show how a focus on communicative and cognitive complexity together can elucidate nuanced manipulations for selfish gains in socially complex groups, under both competitive and cooperative scenarios. Finally, we argue more generally that a research emphasis on communication in complex social groups may accelerate our understanding of the social mechanisms underlying complex adaptive behavior.

Interactions with conspecific outsiders as drivers of cognitive evolution

“…Positive actions between group members, such as the trading of commodities (e.g., grooming for coalitionary support) and the contingent rewarding of cooperative acts, may also generate cognitive demands 9 – 11 . Collectively, these within-group aspects of social life are argued to drive cognitive evolution 12 , 13 and form the basis of the social intelligence hypothesis (SIH) (see Dunbar and Shultz 14 for a review of the SIH and its variants). The SIH was initially conceived with primates in mind and there is strong evidence to suggest that the social environment explains some of the cognitive variation observed in this taxonomic group (e.g., a positive relationship between group size and brain size) 15 .…”

Celebrating the continued importance of “Machiavellian Intelligence” 30 years on.

“…In their essays, Byrne and Whiten outline the foundations of the MIH while reflecting on contemporary considerations of primate social intelligence. In addition to Byrne and Whiten’s retrospective essays, we also showcase two empirical studies (Schweinfurth et al, 2018; Borgeaud & Bshary, 2018) and a review by Lucas et al (2018) that considers how animals’ communicative abilities might interface with the MIH.…”

“…In their review, Lucas et al (2018) stretch the previous focus of Machiavellian Intelligence on behavioral interactions to communicative interactions. They consider the interplay between social complexity and communicative complexity, providing examples from an array of species to support their arguments, beyond the primate-centered focus of Machiavellian Intelligence (Byrne & Whiten, 1988a).…”

Measuring communicative complexity across modalities: a new framework in the context of the “social complexity hypothesis” and its application in true lemurs

“…First, an increase in social complexity results in greater uncertainty in terms of the diversity of individuals an individual may interact with (Freeberg et al 2012a;Gero et al 2016; Figure 1). This uncertainty is expected to drive selection for social signals mediating social recognition allowing individuals to interact effectively and efficiently (Gero et al 2016;Lucas et al 2018). Recognition may take place at different levels.…”

“…Because the amount and precision of information that can be conveyed depend on communicative diversity and flexibility, the latest is expected to evolve when social complexity increases. need to monitor and manage the behavior of their group members (Freeberg et al 2012a;Lucas et al 2018). They particularly need to integrate information about the frequency, duration, and consequences of different types of interactions with each of their partners (Aureli and Schino 2019).…”