1
|
Vonk J. Prosocial or photo preferences? Gorillas' prosocial choices using a touchscreen. Am J Primatol 2024; 86:e23612. [PMID: 38425016 DOI: 10.1002/ajp.23612] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/20/2023] [Revised: 02/11/2024] [Accepted: 02/17/2024] [Indexed: 03/02/2024]
Abstract
Three male Western lowland gorillas (Gorilla gorilla gorilla) were given the opportunity to select their own or conspecific photos on a touchscreen to indicate whether they wished the experimenter to deliver a food reward only to them or to them and the selected conspecific(s). This is only the second symbolic test of prosocial preferences with apes using a touchscreen, and the first with gorillas. The use of self and other photographs as symbols of prosocial choices was intuitive while controlling for the distraction of visible food rewards, and allowing for tests of transfer to further validate apparent prosocial intentions. Gorillas rapidly learned to avoid selecting a photograph of an empty enclosure that resulted in no rewards for any of the gorillas and transferred this learning to a novel photograph. The gorillas did not behave in a consistently self-interested or prosocial manner but they clearly rejected the opportunity to choose spitefully. Their preferences for certain photographs did not necessarily reflect a preference to be prosocial toward that particular individual because these preferences did not transfer to novel photographs of the same individuals. The results call into question whether gorillas recognize themselves and conspecifics in photographs but cannot conclusively speak to whether gorillas have prosocial preferences. They do stress the importance of carefully probing alternative explanations when inferring intentions from observable behaviors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jennifer Vonk
- Department of Psychology, Oakland University, Rochester, Michigan, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Verspeek J, van Leeuwen EJC, Laméris DW, Staes N, Stevens JMG. Adult bonobos show no prosociality in both prosocial choice task and group service paradigm. PeerJ 2022; 10:e12849. [PMID: 35178297 PMCID: PMC8815371 DOI: 10.7717/peerj.12849] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/07/2021] [Accepted: 01/07/2022] [Indexed: 01/10/2023] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jonas Verspeek
- Centre for Research and Conservation, Royal Zoological Society of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium,Behavioural Ecology and Ecophysiology Group, Department of Biology, University of Antwerp, Wilrijk, Belgium
| | - Edwin J. C. van Leeuwen
- Centre for Research and Conservation, Royal Zoological Society of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium,Behavioural Ecology and Ecophysiology Group, Department of Biology, University of Antwerp, Wilrijk, Belgium
| | - Daan W. Laméris
- Centre for Research and Conservation, Royal Zoological Society of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium,Behavioural Ecology and Ecophysiology Group, Department of Biology, University of Antwerp, Wilrijk, Belgium
| | - Nicky Staes
- Centre for Research and Conservation, Royal Zoological Society of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium,Behavioural Ecology and Ecophysiology Group, Department of Biology, University of Antwerp, Wilrijk, Belgium
| | - Jeroen M. G. Stevens
- Centre for Research and Conservation, Royal Zoological Society of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium,Behavioural Ecology and Ecophysiology Group, Department of Biology, University of Antwerp, Wilrijk, Belgium,SALTO, Agro- and Biotechnology, Odisee University College, Brussels, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Zheng W, Li Y, Ye H, Luo J. Effect of Modulating DLPFC Activity on Antisocial and Prosocial Behavior: Evidence From a tDCS Study. Front Psychol 2021; 11:579792. [PMID: 33519597 PMCID: PMC7838216 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.579792] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/03/2020] [Accepted: 12/04/2020] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
Antisocial behavior and prosocial behavior in the condition of inequality have long been observed in daily life. Understanding the neurological mechanisms and brain regions associated with antisocial and prosocial behavior and the development of new interventions are important for reducing violence and inequality. Fortunately, neurocognitive research and brain imaging research have found a correlation between antisocial or prosocial behavior and the prefrontal cortex. Recent brain stimulation research adopting transcranial direct current stimulation or transcranial magnetic stimulation has shown a causal relationship between brain regions and behaviors, but the findings are mixed. In the present study, we aimed to study whether stimulation of the DLPFC can change participants’ antisocial and prosocial behavior in the condition of inequality. We integrated antisocial and prosocial behavior in a unified paradigm. Based on this paradigm, we discussed costly and cost-free antisocial and prosocial behavior. In addition, we also measured participants’ disadvantageous and advantageous inequality aversion. The current study revealed an asymmetric effect of bilateral stimulation over the DLPFC on costly antisocial behavior, while such an effect of antisocial behavior without cost and prosocial behavior with and without cost were not observed. Moreover, costly antisocial behavior exhibited by men increased after receiving right anodal/left cathodal stimulation and decreased after receiving right cathodal anodal/left anodal stimulation compared with the behavior observed under sham stimulation. However, subjects’ inequality aversion was not influenced by tDCS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Wanjun Zheng
- Center for Economic Behavior and Decision-Making, Zhejiang University of Finance and Economics, Hangzhou, China.,School of Economics, Zhejiang University of Finance and Economics, Hangzhou, China
| | - Yuzhen Li
- Center for Economic Behavior and Decision-Making, Zhejiang University of Finance and Economics, Hangzhou, China.,School of Economics, Zhejiang University of Finance and Economics, Hangzhou, China
| | - Hang Ye
- Center for Economic Behavior and Decision-Making, Zhejiang University of Finance and Economics, Hangzhou, China.,School of Economics, Zhejiang University of Finance and Economics, Hangzhou, China
| | - Jun Luo
- Center for Economic Behavior and Decision-Making, Zhejiang University of Finance and Economics, Hangzhou, China.,School of Economics, Zhejiang University of Finance and Economics, Hangzhou, China
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Not by the same token: A female orangutan (Pongo pygmaeus) is selectively prosocial. Primates 2019; 61:237-247. [PMID: 31813075 DOI: 10.1007/s10329-019-00780-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/13/2019] [Accepted: 12/02/2019] [Indexed: 10/25/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
|
5
|
Ballesta S, Reymond G, Duhamel JR. Short-Term Reciprocity in Macaque's Social Decision-Making. Front Behav Neurosci 2019; 13:225. [PMID: 31616262 PMCID: PMC6768951 DOI: 10.3389/fnbeh.2019.00225] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/11/2019] [Accepted: 09/11/2019] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sébastien Ballesta
- Centre de Neuroscience Cognitive, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, UMR 5229, Bron, France
- Département de Biologie Humaine, Université Lyon 1, Villeurbanne, France
| | - Gilles Reymond
- Centre de Neuroscience Cognitive, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, UMR 5229, Bron, France
- Département de Biologie Humaine, Université Lyon 1, Villeurbanne, France
| | - Jean-René Duhamel
- Centre de Neuroscience Cognitive, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, UMR 5229, Bron, France
- Département de Biologie Humaine, Université Lyon 1, Villeurbanne, France
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Pérez-Manrique A, Gomila A. Bottlenose dolphins do not behave prosocially in an instrumental helping task. Behav Processes 2019; 164:54-58. [PMID: 31026488 DOI: 10.1016/j.beproc.2019.04.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/28/2018] [Revised: 04/17/2019] [Accepted: 04/22/2019] [Indexed: 01/07/2023]
Abstract
Although bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) are known for being a highly social species that live in complex societies that rely on coalition formation and cooperative behaviours, experimental studies on prosocial behaviour in this species are scarce. Helping others reach their goals (instrumental helping) is considered as an example of prosocial behaviour. Thus, in this pilot study, we examined whether a group of five captive bottlenose dolphins would behave prosocially in an instrumental helping task. Dolphins were given the opportunity to share tokens that allow their partners to obtain a preferred toy. Dolphins were tested in their free time and they could choose to share the tokens or do nothing. None of the dolphins shared the tokens, instead, they preferred to play with them, ignoring their partners. They did transfer the tokens to other sides of the pool but out of the reach of their partners. Therefore, this group of dolphins did not spontaneously help their partners in this task, showing no preference for other-regarding behaviour in this context.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ana Pérez-Manrique
- Human Evolution and Cognition, IFISC (CSIC-UIB) and Department of Psychology, University of the Balearic Islands, 07122 Palma, Spain.
| | - Antoni Gomila
- Human Evolution and Cognition, IFISC (CSIC-UIB) and Department of Psychology, University of the Balearic Islands, 07122 Palma, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Pérez-Manrique A, Gomila A. The comparative study of empathy: sympathetic concern and empathic perspective-taking in non-human animals. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc 2017; 93:248-269. [DOI: 10.1111/brv.12342] [Citation(s) in RCA: 33] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/21/2016] [Revised: 04/25/2017] [Accepted: 05/03/2017] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Ana Pérez-Manrique
- Department of Psychology; Human Evolution and Cognition Group (EvoCog), UIB, IFISC, Associated Unit to CSIC; 07122 Palma Spain
| | - Antoni Gomila
- Department of Psychology; Human Evolution and Cognition Group (EvoCog), UIB, IFISC, Associated Unit to CSIC; 07122 Palma Spain
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Dale R, Quervel-Chaumette M, Huber L, Range F, Marshall-Pescini S. Task Differences and Prosociality; Investigating Pet Dogs' Prosocial Preferences in a Token Choice Paradigm. PLoS One 2016; 11:e0167750. [PMID: 28002432 PMCID: PMC5176280 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0167750] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/09/2016] [Accepted: 11/19/2016] [Indexed: 11/18/2022] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rachel Dale
- Comparative Cognition, Messerli Research Institute, University of Veterinary Medicine, University of Vienna, 1 Veterinärplatz, Vienna, Austria
- Wolf Science Center, Ernstbrunn, Austria
| | - Mylène Quervel-Chaumette
- Comparative Cognition, Messerli Research Institute, University of Veterinary Medicine, University of Vienna, 1 Veterinärplatz, Vienna, Austria
| | - Ludwig Huber
- Comparative Cognition, Messerli Research Institute, University of Veterinary Medicine, University of Vienna, 1 Veterinärplatz, Vienna, Austria
| | - Friederike Range
- Comparative Cognition, Messerli Research Institute, University of Veterinary Medicine, University of Vienna, 1 Veterinärplatz, Vienna, Austria
- Wolf Science Center, Ernstbrunn, Austria
| | - Sarah Marshall-Pescini
- Comparative Cognition, Messerli Research Institute, University of Veterinary Medicine, University of Vienna, 1 Veterinärplatz, Vienna, Austria
- Wolf Science Center, Ernstbrunn, Austria
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Tennie C, Jensen K, Call J. The nature of prosociality in chimpanzees. Nat Commun 2016; 7:13915. [PMID: 27996969 PMCID: PMC5187495 DOI: 10.1038/ncomms13915] [Citation(s) in RCA: 41] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/10/2015] [Accepted: 11/11/2016] [Indexed: 12/04/2022] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Claudio Tennie
- School of Psychology, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK
| | - Keith Jensen
- School of Psychological Sciences, University of Manchester, Coupland 1 Building, Coupland Street, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PL, UK
| | - Josep Call
- School of Psychology & Neuroscience, University of St Andrews, St. Andrews, Fife KY16 9JU, UK
- Department of Developmental and Comparative Psychology, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Deutscher Platz 6, Leipzig D-04103, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
|
11
|
Marshall-Pescini S, Dale R, Quervel-Chaumette M, Range F. Critical issues in experimental studies of prosociality in non-human species. Anim Cogn 2016; 19:679-705. [PMID: 27000780 PMCID: PMC4891369 DOI: 10.1007/s10071-016-0973-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 55] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/03/2015] [Revised: 01/29/2016] [Accepted: 03/04/2016] [Indexed: 02/05/2023]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S Marshall-Pescini
- Comparative Cognition, Messerli Research Institute, University of Veterinary Medicine, Vienna, Medical University of Vienna, University of Vienna, Veterinärplatz 1, 1210, Vienna, Austria.
- Wolf Science Centre, Ernstbrunn, Austria.
| | - R Dale
- Comparative Cognition, Messerli Research Institute, University of Veterinary Medicine, Vienna, Medical University of Vienna, University of Vienna, Veterinärplatz 1, 1210, Vienna, Austria
- Wolf Science Centre, Ernstbrunn, Austria
| | - M Quervel-Chaumette
- Comparative Cognition, Messerli Research Institute, University of Veterinary Medicine, Vienna, Medical University of Vienna, University of Vienna, Veterinärplatz 1, 1210, Vienna, Austria
| | - F Range
- Comparative Cognition, Messerli Research Institute, University of Veterinary Medicine, Vienna, Medical University of Vienna, University of Vienna, Veterinärplatz 1, 1210, Vienna, Austria
- Wolf Science Centre, Ernstbrunn, Austria
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
|
13
|
Abstract
Primates live in highly social environments, where prosocial behaviors promote social bonds and cohesion and contribute to group members' fitness. Despite a growing interest in the biological basis of nonhuman primates' social interactions, their underlying motivations remain a matter of debate. We report that macaque monkeys take into account the welfare of their peers when making behavioral choices bringing about pleasant or unpleasant outcomes to a monkey partner. Two macaques took turns in making decisions that could impact their own welfare or their partner's. Most monkeys were inclined to refrain from delivering a mildly aversive airpuff and to grant juice rewards to their partner. Choice consistency between these two types of outcome suggests that monkeys display coherent motivations in different social interactions. Furthermore, spontaneous affilitative group interactions in the home environment were mostly consistent with the measured social decisions, thus emphasizing the impact of preexisting social bonds on decision-making. Interestingly, unique behavioral markers predicted these decisions: benevolence was associated with enhanced mutual gaze and empathic eye blinking, whereas indifference or malevolence was associated with lower or suppressed such responses. Together our results suggest that prosocial decision-making is sustained by an intrinsic motivation for social affiliation and controlled through positive and negative vicarious reinforcements.
Collapse
|
14
|
Abstract
The human sense of fairness is an evolutionary puzzle. To study this, we can look to other species, in which this can be translated empirically into responses to reward distribution. Passive and active protest against receiving less than a partner for the same task is widespread in species that cooperate outside kinship and mating bonds. There is less evidence that nonhuman species seek to equalize outcomes to their own detriment, yet the latter has been documented in our closest relatives, the apes. This reaction probably reflects an attempt to forestall partner dissatisfaction with obtained outcomes and its negative impact on future cooperation. We hypothesize that it is the evolution of this response that allowed the development of a complete sense of fairness in humans, which aims not at equality for its own sake but for the sake of continued cooperation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarah F Brosnan
- Departments of Psychology and Philosophy, Neuroscience Institute and Language Research Center, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
| | - Frans B M de Waal
- Living Links, Yerkes National Primate Research Center and Psychology Department, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA
| |
Collapse
|