Third-party social evaluation of humans by monkeys

Anderson, James R.; Kuroshima, Hika; Takimoto, Ayaka; Fujita, Kazuo

doi:10.1038/ncomms2495

Cited by 66 publications

(60 citation statements)

References 21 publications

(18 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The marmosets accepted the food from both actors equally when they had observed reciprocal exchange between the human actors, but they accepted the food less frequently from the non-reciprocating actor than they did from the reciprocating actor. These findings suggest that mar- mosets possess the socio-cognitive abilities as seen in capuchin monkeys [9,10].…”

mentioning

confidence: 90%

Indifference of marmosets with prenatal valproate exposure to third-party non-reciprocal interactions with otherwise avoided non-reciprocal individuals

Yasue

Nakagami

Banno

et al. 2015

Behavioural Brain Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

mentioning

confidence: 90%

Indifference of marmosets with prenatal valproate exposure to third-party non-reciprocal interactions with otherwise avoided non-reciprocal individuals

Yasue

Nakagami

Banno

et al. 2015

Behavioural Brain Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In the case of tool use, the individuals with whom captive animals are coming into contact may in fact be tool-using humans, which is of particular importance for those species that are able to view humans as behavioural role models [50]. Not all species may be able to view humans in this manner, although studies of fairness in non-human primates and object manipulation in crows demonstrate its plausibility as a mechanism [51,52]. In some primate cases, the positive effect of human interaction on animal tool use has been directly observed, for example in human-raised capuchin monkeys [53], and in wild vervet monkeys that were in regular contact with humans and human facilities [54].…”

Section: (B) Factors Promoting Captivity Biasmentioning

confidence: 99%

‘Captivity bias’ in animal tool use and its implications for the evolution of hominin technology

Haslam

2013

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Animals in captive or laboratory settings may outperform wild animals of the same species in both frequency and diversity of tool use, a phenomenon here termed ‘captivity bias’. Although speculative at this stage, a logical conclusion from this concept is that animals whose tool-use behaviour is observed solely under natural conditions may be judged cognitively or physically inferior than if they had also been tested or observed under controlled captive conditions. In turn, this situation creates a potential problem for studies of the behaviour of extinct members of the human family tree—the hominins—as hominin cognitive abilities are often judged on material evidence of tool-use behaviour left in the archaeological record. In this review, potential factors contributing to captivity bias in primates (including increased contact between individuals engaged in tool use, guidance or shaping of tool-use behaviour by other tool-users and increased free time and energy) are identified and assessed for their possible effects on the behaviour of the Late Pleistocene hominin Homo floresiensis . The captivity bias concept provides one way to uncouple hominin tool use from cognition, by considering hominins as subject to the same adaptive influences as other tool-using animals.

show abstract

“…In studies with non-human primates researchers used a similar viewpoint considering the problem of choosing the appropriate partner to cooperate with and more importantly, to avoid harmful individuals. However, these authors used different terms to describe the phenomenon, such as reputation formation (Herrmann et al, 2013), image scoring (Russell et al, 2008) and social evaluation (Anderson et al, 2013a). Researchers working on dogs referred to this skill mostly as social eavesdropping (Marshall-Pescini et al, 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Origin of Social Evaluation, Social Eavesdropping, Reputation Formation, Image Scoring or What You Will

Abdai

Miklósi

2016

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social evaluation is a mental process that leverages the preference toward prosocial partners (positivity bias) against the avoidance of antisocial individuals (negativity bias) in a cooperative context. The phenomenon is well-known in humans, and recently comparative investigations looked at the possible evolutionary origins. So far social evaluation has been investigated mainly in non-human and human primates and dogs, however, there are few data on the presence of negativity/positivity bias in client-cleaner reef fish interactions as well. Unfortunately, the comparative approach to social evaluation is hindered by conceptual and procedural differences in experimental studies. By reviewing current knowledge on social evaluation in different species, we aim to point out that the capacity for social evaluation is not restricted to humans alone; however, its building blocks (negativity and positivity bias) may be more widespread separately. Due to its importance in survival, negativity bias likely to be widespread among animals; however, there has been less intensive selective pressure for the identification of prosocial companions, thus the latter ability may have emerged only in certain social species. We present a general framework and argue that negativity and positivity bias evolve independently and can be considered as social evaluation only if a unified behavior and cognitive system deals with both biases in concert.

show abstract

Third-party social evaluation of humans by monkeys

Cited by 66 publications

References 21 publications

Indifference of marmosets with prenatal valproate exposure to third-party non-reciprocal interactions with otherwise avoided non-reciprocal individuals

Indifference of marmosets with prenatal valproate exposure to third-party non-reciprocal interactions with otherwise avoided non-reciprocal individuals

‘Captivity bias’ in animal tool use and its implications for the evolution of hominin technology

The Origin of Social Evaluation, Social Eavesdropping, Reputation Formation, Image Scoring or What You Will

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About