Task design influences prosociality in captive chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes)

Empirical challenges from the comparative and developmental literature to the Shared Intentionality Theory - a review of alternative data on recursive mind reading, prosociality, imitation and cumulative culture

Humans have an irresistible inclination to coordinate actions with others, leading to species-unique forms of cooperation. According to the highly influential Shared Intentionality Theory (SITh), human cooperation is made possible by shared intentionality (SI), typically defined as a suite of socio-cognitive and motivational traits for sharing psychological states with others, thereby enabling individuals to engage in joint action in the mutually aware pursuit of shared goals. SITh theorises that SI evolved as late as 400,000 years ago, when our ancestors (in particular, Homo heidelbergensis) turned to a kind of food procurement that obligatorily required joint coordinated action. SI is, thus, hypothesized to be absent in other extant species, including our closest genetic relatives, the nonhuman great apes ("apes"). According to SITh, ape psychology is exclusively driven by individualistic motivations, as opposed to human psychology which is uniquely driven by altruistic motivations. The evolutionary scenario proposed by SITh builds on a series of findings from socio-cognitive research with apes and human children, and on the assumption that abilities expressed early in human development are human universals, unlikely to have been shaped by socio-cultural influences. Drawing on the primatological and developmental literature, we provide a systematic - albeit selective - review of SITh-inconsistent findings concerning psychological and behavioural traits theorised to be constitutive of SI. The findings we review pertain to all three thematic clusters typically addressed in SITh: (i) recursive mind reading; (ii) prosociality; (iii) imitation and cumulative culture. We conclude that such alternative data undermine two core SITh claims: the late evolutionary emergence of SI and the radical divide between ape and human psychology. We also discuss several conceptual and methodological limitations that currently hamper reliable comparative research on SI, in particular those engendered by Western-centric biases in the social sciences, where an overreliance on Western samples has promoted the formulation of Western-centric conceptualisations, operationalisations and methodologies.

Family first! Influence of parental investment in Guinea pigs (Cavia porcellus) prosocial choices

Literature often assumed that prosocial behaviours (behaviours that benefit others with or without a cost for the actor) would have evolved many species to improve the effectiveness of parental care (Decety and Cowell 2014). While this hypothesis is rarely questioned at a phylogenetic scale, it was never tested at an individual scale to the best of our knowledge. Therefore, we chose to study the impact of effective parental care on prosociality by comparing the prosocial tendencies of Guinea pigs before mating, during mating and after parturition. We conducted Prosocial Choice Tests on three groups of Guinea pigs (males, multiparous females, and nulliparous females). Subjects had to choose between three options: a prosocial option (subject and recipient being rewarded), a selfish option (only subject was rewarded), and a null option (no reward). Our results showed high prosociality towards their mating partner and their young both in male and in female subjects. Males became selfish towards other males after parturition. Among other interesting results, we found a direct reciprocity phenomenon. We also highlighted an ability in our subjects to consider both the identity and relationship shared with the recipient, such as tolerance (enhancing prosociality), dominance rank (being tested with a dominant recipient increasing selfish responses), and its behaviour (begging calls eliciting prosociality, while threatening ones decreasing it), to choose an option. These findings suggested that prosociality could be modulated by many factors and that the constraints and stakes induced by breeding would highly influence prosocial strategies.

Self-interest precludes prosocial juice provisioning in a free choice group experiment in bonobos

Previous studies on prosociality in bonobos have reported contrasting results, which might partly be explained by differences in experimental contexts. In this study, we implement a free choice group experiment in which bonobos can provide fruit juice to their group members at a low cost for themselves. Four out of five bonobos passed a training phase and understood the setup and provisioned fruit juice in a total of 17 dyads. We show that even in this egalitarian group with a shallow hierarchy, the majority of pushing was done by the alpha female, who monopolized the setup and provided most juice to two adult females, her closest social partners. Nonetheless, the bonobos in this study pushed less frequently than the chimpanzees in the original juice-paradigm study, suggesting that bonobos might be less likely than chimpanzees to provide benefits to group members. Moreover, in half of the pushing acts, subjects obtained juice for themselves, suggesting that juice provisioning was partly driven by self-regarding behavior. Our study indicates that a more nuanced view on the prosocial food provisioning nature of bonobos is warranted but based on this case study, we suggest that the observed sex differences in providing food to friends corresponds with the socio-ecological sex difference in cooperative interactions in wild and zoo-housed bonobos.

Adult bonobos show no prosociality in both prosocial choice task and group service paradigm

Previous studies reported contrasting conclusions concerning bonobo prosociality, which are likely due to differences in the experimental design, the social dynamics among subjects and characteristics of the subjects themselves. Two hypotheses have been proposed to explain the occurrence of prosociality in animals: the cooperative breeding hypothesis and the self-domestication hypothesis. While the former predicts low levels of prosociality in bonobos because they are non-cooperative breeders, the latter predicts high levels of prosociality because self-domestication has been proposed to select for high levels of tolerance in this species. Here, we presented a group of thirteen bonobos with two platform food-provisioning tasks: the prosocial choice task (PCT) and the group service paradigm (GSP). The latter has so far never been applied to bonobos. To allow for free choice of participation and partner, we implemented both tasks in a group setting. Like in previous PCT studies, bonobos did not choose the prosocial option more often when a group member could benefit vs not benefit. In the GSP, where food provisioning is costly, only subadult bonobos showed a limited amount of food provisioning, which was much lower than what was previously reported for chimpanzees. In both experiments, adult subjects were highly motivated to obtain rewards for themselves, suggesting that bonobos behaved indifferently to the gains of group members. We suggest that previous positive food-provisioning prosociality results in bonobos are mainly driven by the behaviour of subadult subjects. The lack of prosociality in this study corresponds to the hypothesis that proactive food provisioning co-occurs with cooperative breeding and suggests that proactive prosociality might not be part of the self-domestication syndrome in bonobos.

On experimental tests for studying altruism in capuchin monkeys

Altruism is often considered as the ultimate form of prosociality and is defined as any act that benefits others without direct benefit to the actor. Many nonhuman species have been reported to express different forms of altruism, although their expression in experimental studies is highly dependent on the paradigm used. Tufted capuchin monkeys are one of the most studied species; however, the evidence for altruism in this species remains inconclusive. This study aimed to investigate whether two paradigms, adapted from those in which great apes have shown altruism, could be useful for revealing signs of altruistic capabilities in capuchins. Pairs of monkeys were tested in two experiments involving a similar mechanism but with different costs to acting altruistically. The first used a more costly operant sharing task in which an operator could unlock a door to allow a recipient to enter the room and share his food. The second consisted of a less costly helping task, in which the operator's food was secured but he could help the recipient to get other food that was in a locked container. The results suggest that capuchins, although apparently unwilling to share their food in a costly operant situation, might altruistically help selected recipients, in response to requesting by the latter. While our small sample size along with procedural limitations preclude firm conclusions, we discuss how further ameliorations of our tasks could further contribute to the study of altruistic capacities in primates.

Prosociality and reciprocity in capybaras (Hydrochoerus hydrochaeris) in a non-reproductive context

Prosocial behaviours (providing benefits to a recipient with or without cost for the donor) have been found to be highly influenced by sex and by hierarchy. Rodents, in particular, are good model for studying prosocial responses, as they were found to exhibit intentional prosocial behaviours to reward a conspecific, and are very sensitive to reciprocity. In our study, we conducted a Prosocial Choice Test (PCT) in which four capybaras (Hydrochoerus hydrochaeris) living in a social group could choose between three tokens: choosing the prosocial token rewarded simultaneously the subject and a recipient, while choosing the selfish token only rewarded the subject; and choosing the null token provided no reward to anyone. Dominance within each dyad was also studied, both before and during the PCT experiment. Our results showed an influence of hierarchy: subjects were more prosocial towards the recipient when it was a subordinate than when it was a dominant individual. These results could be interpreted as a desire of strengthening a hierarchical rank regarding the subordinate, of punishing aggressive conspecifics (usually the subject's direct dominant), and of weakening dominant individuals in order to modify the pre-existing hierarchy. Additionally, our results highlighted a direct reciprocity phenomenon, a subject being more likely to be prosocial towards a prosocial recipient. All these findings suggest that prosociality could be well developed in other taxa than Primates and that, in long enough PCT experiments, subtle rules could influence individual prosocial strategies.

Prosocial and antisocial choices in a monogamous cichlid with biparental care

Human society is cooperative and characterized by spontaneous prosociality. Comparative studies on endotherm vertebrates suggest that social interdependence causes the evolution of proactive prosociality. To test the generality of this hypothesis, we modify a prosocial choice task for application to the convict cichlid, Amatitlania nigrofasciata, a monogamous fish with biparental care and a strong pair bond. We also affirm that male subjects learn to favor prosocial choices when their mates are the recipients in a neighboring tank. When the neighboring tank is empty, males choose randomly. Furthermore, in the absence of their mates, males behave prosocially toward a stranger female. However, if the mate of the subjects is also visible in the third tank, or if a male is a potential recipient, then subjects make antisocial choices. To conclude, fish may show both spontaneous prosocial and antisocial behaviors according to their social relationships with conspecifics and the overall social context.

Prosociality and reciprocity in bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus)

Some moral behaviours, often regarded as reflecting high cognitive abilities (such as empathy, cooperation, targeted helping) are known to only be present in very few species, like great apes, elephants and cetaceans. Prosocial behaviours (producing a benefit for the recipient without necessarily involving a cost for the actor) have been mostly found in primates and, more recently, in elephants. Despite dolphins' reputation for helping their conspecifics, experimental studies about their prosocial and empathic abilities are rare. We conducted Prosocial Choice Tests in six bottlenose dolphins. The subjects had to choose between three objects: choosing the prosocial object induced the simultaneous rewarding of both the subject and a recipient individual; choosing the selfish object induced a reward only for the subject; choosing the null one did not reward anyone. We found prosociality and direct reciprocity in our subjects, and our results suggested that bottlenose dolphins might be able to modulate their prosocial and reciprocal tendencies according to partner-specific information. Subjects seemed to be more prosocial towards the other sex and more reciprocal towards same-sex recipients. This reciprocity might be underpinned by the same features that rule their behaviours in the wild (cooperating with same sex conspecifics). Moreover, an audience effect was reported, as the presence of the subject's young increased subjects' likelihood of prosocial response. Our findings highlighted that prosociality could appear in taxa other than primates, suggesting a convergent evolutionary phenomenon.

Pro-social preference in an automated operant two-choice reward task under different housing conditions: Exploratory studies on pro-social decision making

In this study, we aimed to develop a behavioral task that measures pro-social decision making in rats. A fully automated, operant pro-social two-choice task is introduced that quantifies pro-social preferences for a mutual food reward in a set-up with tightly controlled task contingencies. Pairs of same-sex adult Wistar rats were placed in an operant chamber divided into two compartments (one rat per compartment), separated by a transparent barrier with holes that allowed the rats to see, hear, smell, but not touch each other. Test rats could earn a sucrose pellet either for themselves (own reward) or for themselves and the partner (both reward) by means of lever pressing. On average, male rats showed a 60 % preference for the lever that yielded a food reward for both themselves and their partner. In contrast, females did not show lever preference, regardless of the estrous cycle phase. Next, the impact of juvenile environmental factors on male rat social decision making was studied. Males were group-housed from postnatal day 26 onwards in complex housing Marlau™ cages that provided social and physical enrichment and stimulation in the form of novelty. Complex housed males did not show a preference for the pro-social lever.

Not by the same token: A female orangutan (Pongo pygmaeus) is selectively prosocial

Studies of prosocial behavior in nonhumans have focused on group-living social animals. Despite being highly social and closely related to humans, chimpanzees have rarely exhibited prosocial preferences in experimental tasks. Fewer studies have provided their non group-living relatives-orangutans-with the opportunity to express prosocial preferences. Here, we allowed a single female orangutan to provide rewards for herself and for her mother, sister, or both, across various phases, using a token economy task. The orangutan was more likely to choose prosocially when she could provide rewards to her sister and herself compared to when she could provide rewards to her mother and herself. However, when presented with the simultaneous options of providing rewards for self, self and mother, or self and sister, she chose prosocially equally often to her mother and sister. She made the largest number of prosocial choices in a phase when she could provide rewards to all participants (herself, her sister, and her mother) rather than providing rewards only to herself or only to herself and one other participant. Despite the obvious limitations of a single case study, the study adds to the limited information on prosocial preferences in less social primate species, particularly when given the chance to share food items with different kin.

Assessing African grey parrots' prosocial tendencies in a token choice paradigm

Prosociality is defined as a voluntary, typically low-cost behaviour that benefits another individual. Social tolerance has been proposed as a potential driver for its evolution, both on the proximate and on the ultimate level. Parrots are an interesting species to study such other-regarding behaviours, given that they are highly social and stand out in terms of relative brain size and cognitive capacity. We tested eight African grey parrots in a dyadic prosocial choice test. They faced a choice between two different tokens, a prosocial (actor and partner rewarded) and a selfish (only actor rewarded) one. We found that the birds did not behave prosocially when one subject remained in the actor role; however, when roles were alternated, the birds' prosocial choices increased. The birds also seemed to reciprocate their partner's choices, given that a contingency between choices was observed. If the food provisioned to the partner was of higher quality than that the actor obtained, actors increased their willingness to provide food to their partner. Nonetheless, the control conditions suggest that the parrots did not fully understand the task's contingencies. In sum, African grey parrots show the potential for prosociality and reciprocity; however, considering their lack of understanding of the contingencies of the particular tasks used in this study, the underlying motivation for the observed behaviour remains to be addressed by future studies, in order to elucidate the phylogenetic distribution of prosociality further.

Why intergroup variation matters for understanding behaviour

Intergroup variation (IGV) refers to variation between different groups of the same species. While its existence in the behavioural realm has been expected and evidenced, the potential effects of IGV are rarely considered in studies that aim to shed light on the evolutionary origins of human socio-cognition, especially in our closest living relatives—the great apes. Here, by taking chimpanzees as a point of reference, we argue that (i) IGV could plausibly explain inconsistent research findings across numerous topics of inquiry (experimental/behavioural studies on chimpanzees), (ii) understanding the evolutionary origins of behaviour requires an accurate assessment of species' modes of behaving across different socio-ecological contexts, which necessitates a reliable estimation of variation across intraspecific groups, and (iii) IGV in the behavioural realm is increasingly likely to be expected owing to the progressive identification of non-human animal cultures. With these points, and by extrapolating from chimpanzees to generic guidelines, we aim to encourage researchers to explicitly consider IGV as an explanatory variable in future studies attempting to understand the socio-cognitive and evolutionary determinants of behaviour in group-living animals.

Chimpanzees help others with what they want; children help them with what they need

Humans, including young children, are strongly motivated to help others, even paying a cost to do so. Humans' nearest primate relatives, great apes, are likewise motivated to help others, raising the question of whether the motivations of humans and apes are the same. Here we compared the underlying motivation to help in human children and chimpanzees. Both species understood the situation and helped a conspecific in a straightforward situation. However, when helpers knew that what the other was requesting would not actually help her, only children gave her what she needed instead of giving her what she requested. These results suggest that both chimpanzees and human children help others but the underlying motivation for why they help differs. In comparison to chimpanzees, young children help in a paternalistic manner. The evolutionary hypothesis is that uniquely human socio-ecologies based on interdependent cooperation gave rise to uniquely human prosocial motivations to help others paternalistically.

Relationships between captive chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes) welfare and voluntary participation in behavioural studies

Voluntary participation in behavioural studies offers several scientific, management, and welfare benefits to non-human primates (NHPs). Aside from the scientific benefit of increased understanding of NHP cognition, sociality, and behaviour derived from noninvasive behavioural studies, participation itself has the potential to provide functional simulations of natural behaviours, enrichment opportunities, and increased control over the captive environment, all of which enhance welfare. Despite a developing consensus that voluntary participation offers these welfare enhancements, little research has empirically investigated the ways that participation in behavioural studies may affect welfare. In the current study, we investigated potential relationships between captive chimpanzee welfare and long-term, repeated voluntary participation in noninvasive behavioural studies. We collected behavioural data on 118 chimpanzees at the National Center for Chimpanzee Care (NCCC) in Bastrop, Texas, USA between 2016 and 2018 using 15-minute focal animal samples. Additionally, we collected information on 41 behavioural studies conducted between 2010 and 2018 with the NCCC chimpanzees that involved exposure to a stimulus or manipulation. The total number of behavioural studies in which chimpanzees had participated over the approximately eight-year period was then examined in relation to levels of behavioural diversity, abnormal behaviour, rough scratching, inactivity, and locomotion using a series of regression analyses that controlled for rearing status and age of the chimpanzee at the time of data collection. Analyses revealed significant, positive relationships between the total number of studies in which chimpanzees participated and 1) behavioural diversity scores, R2 adj = .21, F(3,114) = 11.25, p < 0.001; and 2) rough scratching, R2 adj = .11, F(3,114) = 6.01, p = 0.001. The positive relationship between behavioural diversity scores and the total number of studies in which chimpanzees participated seems unsurprising, although we cannot draw conclusions about the directionality of this relationship. The result that rough scratching and the total number of studies in which chimpanzees participated were positively correlated is unexpected. However, rough scratching made up less than 1% of all activity in the current study, and as such, this result may not be biologically meaningful. These findings suggest that participation in behavioural studies is not likely to be detrimental to chimpanzee well-being, and may even be beneficial. Data such as these, which empirically investigate existing recommendations can help inform decisions pertaining to the participation of chimpanzees in behavioural research.

Wolves, but not dogs, are prosocial in a touch screen task

Prosociality is important for initiating cooperation. Interestingly, while wolves rely heavily on cooperation, dogs’ do so substantially less thus leading to the prediction that wolves are more prosocial than dogs. However, domestication hypotheses suggest dogs have been selected for higher cooperation, leading to the opposing prediction- increased prosocial tendencies in dogs. To tease apart these hypotheses we adapted a paradigm previously used with pet dogs to directly compare dogs and wolves. In a prosocial choice task, wolves acted prosocially to in-group partners; providing significantly more food to a pack-member compared to a control where the partner had no access to the food. Dogs did not. Additionally, wolves did not show a prosocial response to non-pack members, in line with previous research that social relationships are important for prosociality. In sum, when kept in the same conditions, wolves are more prosocial than their domestic counterpart, further supporting suggestions that reliance on cooperation is a driving force for prosocial attitudes.

Piloting a new prosociality paradigm in dogs and wolves: The location choice task

The aim of this pilot study was to investigate whether or not dogs (Canis familiaris) and wolves (Canis lupus) show prosociality in a simple T-maze experiment based on a previous study by Hernandez-Lallement et al. (2015). Prosociality, i.e. "voluntary behaviour that benefits others", was initially thought to be uniquely human and, to trace its origin, has mainly been investigated in non-human primates. More recently however, some non-primate species showed considerable amounts of prosociality, suggesting convergent evolutionary paths. Here we tested if wolves and dogs are prosocial in a novel paradigm and, secondly, whether prosociality in dogs is a by-product of domestication or an ancestral trait shared with wolves. With the exception of one wolf, the current task did not reveal a prosocial response in either species, despite the same subjects showing prosocial tendencies in other tasks. Prosociality has been difficult to experimentally observe and it presents a methodological challenge. We are still at the beginning of this journey in Canids and this study adds another piece to the puzzle of how best to investigate this behaviour.

Touch-screen-guided task reveals a prosocial choice tendency by chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes)

Humans help others even without direct benefit for themselves. However, the nature of altruistic (i.e., only the other benefits) and prosocial (i.e., self and other both benefit) behaviors in our closest living relative, the chimpanzee, remains controversial. To address this further, we developed a touch-screen-guided task that allowed us to increase the number of trials for a thorough test of chimpanzees’ prosocial and altruistic tendencies. Mother-offspring dyads were tested in the same compartment; one was the actor while the other was the recipient. In Experiment 1, the actor chose among three options: prosocial, selfish (only the actor benefited) and altruistic. To better understand the nature of the chimpanzees’ choices and to improve experimental control, we conducted two additional experiments. Experiment 2 consisted of two-option choices interspersed with three-option choices, and in Experiment 3 the two-option choice were blocked across all trials. The results of Experiment 1 clearly showed that chimpanzees acted prosocially in the touch-screen-guided task, choosing the prosocial option on an average of 79% of choices. Five out of the six chimpanzees showed the preference to act prosocially against chance level. The preference for the prosocial option persisted when conditions were changed in Experiments 2 and 3. When only selfish and altruistic options were available in Experiments 2 and 3, chimpanzees preferred the selfish option. These results suggest that (1) most individuals understood the nature of the task and modified their behavior according to the available options, (2) five out of the six chimpanzees chose to act prosocially when they had the option to, and (3) offspring counterbalanced between altruistic and selfish, when given those two options perhaps to avoid suffering repercussions from the mother.

Studying primate cognition in a social setting to improve validity and welfare: a literature review highlighting successful approaches

BACKGROUND

Studying animal cognition in a social setting is associated with practical and statistical challenges. However, conducting cognitive research without disturbing species-typical social groups can increase ecological validity, minimize distress, and improve animal welfare. Here, we review the existing literature on cognitive research run with primates in a social setting in order to determine how widespread such testing is and highlight approaches that may guide future research planning.

SURVEY METHODOLOGY

Using Google Scholar to search the terms "primate" "cognition" "experiment" and "social group," we conducted a systematic literature search covering 16 years (2000-2015 inclusive). We then conducted two supplemental searches within each journal that contained a publication meeting our criteria in the original search, using the terms "primate" and "playback" in one search and the terms "primate" "cognition" and "social group" in the second. The results were used to assess how frequently nonhuman primate cognition has been studied in a social setting (>3 individuals), to gain perspective on the species and topics that have been studied, and to extract successful approaches for social testing.

RESULTS

Our search revealed 248 unique publications in 43 journals encompassing 71 species. The absolute number of publications has increased over years, suggesting viable strategies for studying cognition in social settings. While a wide range of species were studied they were not equally represented, with 19% of the publications reporting data for chimpanzees. Field sites were the most common environment for experiments run in social groups of primates, accounting for more than half of the results. Approaches to mitigating the practical and statistical challenges were identified.

DISCUSSION

This analysis has revealed that the study of primate cognition in a social setting is increasing and taking place across a range of environments. This literature review calls attention to examples that may provide valuable models for researchers wishing to overcome potential practical and statistical challenges to studying cognition in a social setting, ultimately increasing validity and improving the welfare of the primates we study.

Chimpanzees return favors at a personal cost

Humans regularly provide others with resources at a personal cost to themselves. Chimpanzees engage in some cooperative behaviors in the wild as well, but their motivational underpinnings are unclear. In three experiments, chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) always chose between an option delivering food both to themselves and a partner and one delivering food only to themselves. In one condition, a conspecific partner had just previously taken a personal risk to make this choice available. In another condition, no assistance from the partner preceded the subject's decision. Chimpanzees made significantly more prosocial choices after receiving their partner's assistance than when no assistance was given (experiment 1) and, crucially, this was the case even when choosing the prosocial option was materially costly for the subject (experiment 2). Moreover, subjects appeared sensitive to the risk of their partner's assistance and chose prosocially more often when their partner risked losing food by helping (experiment 3). These findings demonstrate experimentally that chimpanzees are willing to incur a material cost to deliver rewards to a conspecific, but only if that conspecific previously assisted them, and particularly when this assistance was risky. Some key motivations involved in human cooperation thus may have deeper phylogenetic roots than previously suspected.

Task Differences and Prosociality; Investigating Pet Dogs' Prosocial Preferences in a Token Choice Paradigm

Prosociality has received increasing interest by non-human animal researchers since the initial discoveries that suggested it is not a uniquely human trait. However, thus far studies, even within the same species, have not garnered conclusive results. A prominent suggestion for this disparity is the effect methodology can have on prosocial responses in animals. We recently found evidence of prosociality in domestic dogs towards familiar conspecifics using a bar-pulling paradigm, in which a subject could pull a rope to deliver food to its partner. Therefore, the current study aimed to assess whether dogs would show a similar response in a different paradigm, based on the token exchange task paradigm frequently used with primates. In this task, dogs had the option to touch a token with their nose that delivered a reward to an adjacent receiver enclosure, which contained a familiar conspecific, a stranger or no dog at all. Crucially, we also included a social facilitation control condition, whereby the partner (stranger/familiar) was present but unable to access the food. We found that the familiarity effect remained consistent across tasks, with dogs of both the bar-pulling and token choice experiments providing more food to familiar partners than in a non-social control and providing less food to stranger partners than this same control. However, in contrast to our previous bar-pulling experiment, we could not exclude social facilitation as an underlying motive in the current task. We propose this difference in results between tasks may be related to increased task complexity in the token choice paradigm, making it harder for dogs to discriminate between the test and social facilitation conditions. Overall our findings suggest that subtle methodological changes can have an impact on prosocial behaviours in dogs and highlights the importance of controlling for social facilitation effects in such experiments.

The nature of prosociality in chimpanzees

An important debate centres around the nature of prosociality in nonhuman primates. Chimpanzees help other individuals in some experimental settings, yet they do not readily share food. One solution to this paradox is that they are motivated to help others provided there are no competing interests. However, benefits to recipients could arise as by-products of testing. Here we report two studies that separate by-product from intended helping in chimpanzees using a GO/NO-GO paradigm. Actors in one group could help a recipient by releasing a food box, but the same action for another group prevented a recipient from being able to get food. We find no evidence for helping-chimpanzees engaged in the test regardless of the effects on their partners. Illusory prosocial behaviour could arise as a by-product of task design.

Critical issues in experimental studies of prosociality in non-human species

Prosociality and acts of altruism are defined as behaviours which benefit another with either no gain or some immediate cost to the self. To understand the evolutionary origins of these behaviours, in recent years, studies have extended to primate species; however, studies on non-primates are still scarce. In light of the fact that phylogenetic closeness to humans does not appear to correlate with prosocial tendencies, but rather differences in the propensity towards prosociality may be linked to allomaternal care or collaborative foraging, it appears that convergent selection pressures may be at work in the evolution of prosociality. It would hence seem particularly important to extend such studies to species outside the primate clade, to allow for comparative hypothesis testing of the factors affecting the evolution of prosocial behaviours. In the current review, we focus on the experimental paradigms which have been used so far (i.e. the prosocial choice task, helping paradigms and food-sharing tests) and highlight the strengths and weaknesses of each method. In line with the aim of encouraging a broader comparative approach to the topic of prosociality, particular emphasis is placed on the methodological issues that need to be taken into account. We conclude that although a number of the paradigms used so far may be successfully applied to non-primate species, there is a need to simplify the cognitive demands of the tasks and ensure task comprehension to allow for a 'fair' comparative approach of prosocial tendencies across species.

Inequity aversion strategies between marmosets are influenced by partner familiarity and sex but not oxytocin

Cooperation among individuals depends, in large part, on a sense of fairness. Many cooperating non-human primates (NHPs) show inequity aversion, (i.e., negative responses to unequal outcomes), and these responses toward inequity likely evolved as a means to preserve the advantages of cooperative relationships. However, marmosets (Callithrix spp.) tend to show little or no inequity aversion, despite the high occurrence of prosociality and cooperative-breeding in callitrichid monkeys. Oxytocin [OXT] has been implicated in a wide variety of social processes, but little is known about whether OXT modulates inequity aversion toward others. We used a tray pulling task to evaluate whether marmosets would donate superior rewards to their long-term pairmate or an opposite-sex stranger following OXT, OXT antagonist, and saline treatments. We found that marmosets show inequity aversion, and this inequity aversion is socially- and sex-specific. Male marmosets show inequity aversion toward their pairmates but not strangers, and female marmosets do not show inequity aversion. OXT treatments did not significantly influence inequity aversion in marmosets. While OXT may modulate prosocial preferences, the motivations underlying cooperative relationships, such as inequity aversion, are multifaceted. More research is needed to evaluate the evolutionary origins, biological processes, and social contexts that influence complex phenotypes like inequity aversion. Inequity aversion can differ within species in important and distinct ways including between individuals who do and do not share a cooperative relationship. Overall, these findings support the view that inequity aversion is an important behavioural strategy for the maintenance of cooperative relationships.

The evolution of altruistic social preferences in human groups

In this paper, we consider three hypotheses to account for the evolution of the extraordinary capacity for large-scale cooperation and altruistic social preferences within human societies. One hypothesis is that human cooperation is built on the same evolutionary foundations as cooperation in other animal societies, and that fundamental elements of the social preferences that shape our species' cooperative behaviour are also shared with other closely related primates. Another hypothesis is that selective pressures favouring cooperative breeding have shaped the capacity for cooperation and the development of social preferences, and produced a common set of behavioural dispositions and social preferences in cooperatively breeding primates and humans. The third hypothesis is that humans have evolved derived capacities for collaboration, group-level cooperation and altruistic social preferences that are linked to our capacity for culture. We draw on naturalistic data to assess differences in the form, scope and scale of cooperation between humans and other primates, experimental data to evaluate the nature of social preferences across primate species, and comparative analyses to evaluate the evolutionary origins of cooperative breeding and related forms of behaviour.

Familiarity affects other-regarding preferences in pet dogs

Other-regarding preferences are considered to be the foundation of human cooperation. However, the evolutionary origin of this behavior in humans remains poorly understood. So far, comparative studies in primates have led to mixed conclusions probably due to methodological differences relating to both task complexity and the types of control conditions used. Moreover, no clear link between phylogenetic relatedness and prosociality has been found, suggesting that other convergent selection pressures may play a role in the evolution of such behaviors. Here, using one of the cognitively less demanding tasks, we show for the first time, that dogs can behave pro-socially by donating food to a conspecific partner, but only if the partner is familiar. This highlights the importance of considering the social relationships between individuals when testing animals for other-regarding behaviors. Moreover, by including a social control condition, we show that the dogs’ prosocial response was not due to a simple social facilitation effect. The current findings support recent proposals that other convergent selection pressures, such as dependence on cooperative activities, rather than genetic relatedness to humans, may shape a species’ propensity for other-regarding behaviors.

Subadult ravens generally don't transfer valuable tokens to conspecifics when there is nothing to gain for themselves

The extent to which humans help each other is extraordinary in itself, and difficult to explain from an evolutionary perspective. Therefore, there has been a recent surge in studies investigating the evolution of prosocial behavior using a comparative approach. Nevertheless, most of these studies have focused on primates only, and little is known about other animal orders. In a previous study, common ravens (Corvus corax) have been shown to be indifferent to the gains of conspecifics. However, this may have been due to the experimental set-up, as many studies that use different set-ups report conflicting results within the same species. We therefore tested ravens' prosocial tendencies in a different set-up; i.e., we tested whether sub-adult ravens would transfer a token to a partner and, thereby, provide the partner with the opportunity to exchange a token for a reward. To control and test for effects of partner identity, we tested eight individuals both in a dyadic and in a group setting. Our results show that in general the ravens in our experiment did not show other-regarding preferences. However, some acts of helping did occur spontaneously. We discuss what could be the causes for those sporadic instances, and why in general prosocial tendencies were found to be almost lacking among the ravens in this set-up.

Do young children understand relative value comparisons?

Many forms of judgments, such as those used in economic games or measures of social comparison, require understanding relative value, as well as the more complex ability to make comparisons between relative values. To examine whether young children can accurately compare relative values, we presented children 4 to 7 years with simple judgments of relative value in two scenarios. Children then were asked to compare the relative values in the two scenarios. Results show that even the youngest children downgraded evaluations of a reward when another has a larger amount, indicating the ability to make relative value judgments. When asked to compare relative values however, only the oldest children were able to make these comparisons consistently. We then extended this analysis to economic game performance. Specifically, previous results using economic games suggest that younger children are more generous than older ones. We replicate this result, and then show that a simple change in procedure, based on the initial study, is sufficient to change young children's choices. Our results strongly suggest that conclusions regarding young children's pro-social motives based on relative value comparisons should be viewed cautiously.

Orangutans (Pongo spp.) do not spontaneously share benefits with familiar conspecifics in a choice paradigm

Humans are thought to be unique in their ability to help others voluntarily even though it may sometimes incur substantial costs. However, there are a growing number of studies showing that prosocial behaviors can be observed, not only in humans, but also among nonhuman primates that live in complex social groups. Prosociality has often been described as a major factor that facilitates group living. Nonetheless, it has seldom been explored whether solitary living primates, such as orangutans, share this propensity. In the present study, we tested four captive orangutans (Pongo abelii × pigmaeus, Pongo pigmaeus) in a simple food-delivering task. They had a choice, incurring the same cost, between getting a food reward for themselves and providing an additional food reward to a conspecific recipient passively sitting in an adjacent booth. Two orangutans played the actor's role, and two orangutans participated as recipients. The results showed that the actors did not choose to deliver food to the recipients more often than expected by chance (51.3 % on average). The control condition demonstrated that this tendency was independent of the actor's understanding of the task. These findings suggest that orangutans do not spontaneously share benefits with other conspecifics, even when the prosocial choice does not disadvantage them. This study gives the first experimental evidence that socially housed captive orangutans do not behave prosocially in a choice paradigm experiment. Further studies using a different experimental paradigm should be conducted to examine whether this tendency is consistent with previous findings hypothesizing that the enhanced prosocial propensity shown in humans and other group living primates is an evolutionary outcome of living in complex social environments.

Rats prefer mutual rewards in a prosocial choice task

Pro-sociality, i.e., the preference for outcomes that produce benefits for other individuals, is ubiquitous in humans. Recently, cross-species comparisons of social behavior have offered important new insights into the evolution of pro-sociality. Here, we present a rodent analog of the Pro-social Choice Task that controls strategic components, de-confounds other-regarding choice motives from the animals' natural tendencies to maximize own food access and directly tests the effect of social context on choice allocation. We trained pairs of rats—an actor and a partner rat—in a double T-maze task where actors decided between two alternatives only differing in the reward delivered to the partner. The “own reward” choice yielded a reward only accessible to the actor whereas the “both reward” choice produced an additional reward for a partner (partner condition) or an inanimate toy (toy Condition), located in an adjacent compartment. We found that actors chose “both reward” at levels above chance and more often in the partner than in the toy condition. Moreover, we show that this choice pattern adapts to the current social context and that the observed behavior is stable over time.