Evidence of direct reciprocity, but not of indirect and generalized reciprocity, in the grooming exchanges of wild Barbary macaques (Macaca sylvanus )

Human and nonhuman norms: a dimensional framework

Human communities teem with a variety of social norms. In order to change unjust and harmful social norms, it is crucial to identify the psychological processes that give rise to them. Most researchers take it for granted that social norms are uniquely human. By contrast, we approach this matter from a comparative perspective, leveraging recent research on animal social behaviour. While there is currently only suggestive evidence for norms in nonhuman communities, we argue that human social norms are likely produced by a wide range of mechanisms, many of which we share with nonhuman animals. Approaching this variability from a comparative perspective can help norm researchers expand and reframe the range of hypotheses they test when attempting to understand the causes of socially normative behaviours in humans. First, we diagnose some of the theoretical obstacles to developing a comparative science of social norms, and offer a few basic constructs and distinctions to help norm researchers overcome these obstacles. Then we develop a six-dimensional model of the psychological and social factors that contribute to variability in both human and potential nonhuman norms. This article is part of the theme issue 'Social norm change: drivers and consequences'.

No evidence that grooming is exchanged for coalitionary support in the short- or long-term via direct or generalized reciprocity in unrelated rhesus macaques

Abstract

Reciprocity is a prominent explanation for cooperation between non-kin. Studies designed to demonstrate reciprocity often focus on direct reciprocity in the timescale of minutes to hours, whereas alternative mechanisms like generalized reciprocity and the possibility of reciprocation over longer timescales of months and years are less often explored. Using a playback experiment, we tested for evidence of direct and generalized reciprocity across short and longer timescales. We examined the exchange of grooming for coalitionary support between unrelated female rhesus macaques in a population with a complete genetic pedigree. Females that received grooming were not more responsive to calls for coalitionary support from unrelated female group mates compared to control females that received agonism or no interaction — even when the call belonged to a females’ most recent grooming partner. Similarly, females were not more responsive to calls for support from their most frequent unrelated grooming partner of the last two years, nor if they received large amounts of grooming from all other females in their group. We interpret these results as an absence of evidence for direct or generalized reciprocity on any timescale in the exchange of grooming for coalitionary support in rhesus macaques. If grooming is exchanged for support in this population, it is with an intensity below our ability to detect it or over a longer timescale than we examined. We propose by-product explanations may also be at play and highlight the importance of investigating multiple mechanisms when testing apparently cooperative behaviors.

Significance statement

The receipt of help can make some animals more likely to provide help in return, whether it be a singular act, or many acts accumulated over months. Similarly, the receipt of help, be it one act of aid, or a group’s worth of help over time, can make some animals more likely to pay help forward to others. Studies on Old World monkeys suggest females may give grooming and in return receive aid in future physical conflicts. Using a playback experiment, we found female rhesus macaques were not more responsive to calls for intervention in a simulated conflict after being groomed by unrelated females, even if the calling combatant was her most recent, or a long-time grooming partner. Our results suggest females in our study population may be receiving benefits other than support in conflicts for the grooming they provide.

Testing the two sides of indirect reciprocity in tufted capuchin monkeys

We addressed two different aspects of indirect reciprocity in tufted capuchin monkeys (Sapajus spp.) studying two common cooperative behaviours, grooming and food sharing. In an observational study, we tested whether capuchin monkeys were more likely to groom an individual that had just groomed a group mate than an individual that had not groomed anybody. In an experimental study, we tested whether capuchin monkeys were more likely to share their food with a partner when in the presence of a bystander (or of an image of the eyes of a conspecific) than when alone with their partner. In the observational study, we found an increase in the likelihood of receiving grooming after giving grooming, but this effect seemed to depend on social facilitation rather than on indirect reciprocity, as we found a similar effect after receiving (rather than giving) grooming. In the experimental study, the presence of a bystander or of an image of eyes did not affect the amount of food transferred to a group mate. Overall, these results suggest capuchin monkeys do not engage in indirect reciprocity.

Short-Term Reciprocity in Macaque's Social Decision-Making

Primates live in complex social environments, where individuals create meaningful networks by adapting their behavior according to past experiences with others. Although free-ranging primates do show signs of reciprocity, experiments in more controlled environments have mainly failed to reproduce such social dynamics. Hence, the cognitive and neural processes allowing monkeys to reciprocate during social exchanges remains elusive. Here, pairs of long-tailed macaques (Macaca fascicularis) took turns into a social decision task involving the delivery of positive (juice reward) or negative (airpuff) outcomes. By analyzing the contingencies of one partner's past decisions on the other's future decisions, we demonstrate the presence of reciprocity, but only for the exchange of negative outcomes. Importantly, to display this decisional bias, the monkey needs to witness its partner's decisions, since non-social deliveries of the same outcome did not have such effect. Withholding of negative outcomes also predicted future social decisions, which suggest that the observed tit-for-tat strategy may not only be motivated by retaliation after receiving an airpuff but also by the gratefulness of not having received one. These results clarify the apparent dichotomy within the scientific literature of reciprocity in non-human primates and suggest that their social cognition comprise revenge and gratitude.