Competition for resources can explain patterns of social and individual learning in nature

Abstract

In nature, animals often ignore socially available information despite the multiple theoretical benefits of social learning over individual trial-and-error learning. Using information filtered by others is quicker, more efficient and less risky than randomly sampling the environment. To explain the mix of social and individual learning used by animals in nature, most models penalize the quality of socially derived information as either out of date, of poor fidelity or costly to acquire. Competition for limited resources, a fundamental evolutionary force, provides a compelling, yet hitherto overlooked, explanation for the evolution of mixed-learning strategies. We present a novel model of social learning that incorporates competition and demonstrates that (i) social learning is favoured when competition is weak, but (ii) if competition is strong social learning is favoured only when resource quality is highly variable and there is low environmental turnover. The frequency of social learning in our model always evolves until it reduces the mean foraging success of the population. The results of our model are consistent with empirical studies showing that individuals rely less on social information where resources vary little in quality and where there is high within-patch competition. Our model provides a framework for understanding the evolution of social learning, a prerequisite for human cumulative culture.

Harnessing learning biases is essential for applying social learning in conservation

“…Additionally, the value and variability of resources have also been suggested to influence greater use of social information when competition is high (Smolla et al 2015). Even though theories about what conditions should favour social learning have been well explored (see list in Fragaszy and Perry 2003; pg.…”

Fundamental problems with the cooperative breeding hypothesis. A reply to Burkart & van Schaik

“…This ignores the vast body of literature showing that social learning can be unreliable, generating trade-offs with more accurate but more costly individual learning (Boyd & Richerson, 1985;Kendal et al, 2005;Rieucau & Giraldeau, 2011). Where social learning occurs, it is not simply an emergent product of a tolerant social structure, but a response to particular demands arising from factors such as foraging ecology, predation pressure and resource distribution that affect the benefits of social learning (Thornton & Clutton-Brock, 2011;Smolla et al, 2015). Thus, there is no reason to predict that cooperative breeding per se (even if it was associated with a more benign social environment; see above) should be associated with a higher prevalence of social learning, all other things being equal.…”

Animal cognition in a human-dominated world

“…Drawing upon concepts familiar to the invasion biologist, the capacity to learn might be important during the early stages of colonization and establishment, but less so during expansion (Sol et al 2013). Whether or not learning is relevant to the later stages of invasion will depend upon the temporal and spatial variability, complexity and levels of resource competition of urban areas (Dridi and Lehmann 2016;Smolla et al 2015;Stephens 1991). Unfortunately, we know little about these environmental variables at scales that can be linked to the behaviour of individuals (Shochat et al 2006).…”