Abstract
Post-conflict affiliation between former opponents and bystanders occurs in several species of non-human primates. It is classified in four categories of which affiliation received by the former victim, ‘consolation’, has received most attention. The hypotheses of cognitive constraint and social constraint are inadequate to explain its occurrence. The cognitive constraint hypothesis is contradicted by recent evidence of ‘consolation’ in monkeys and the social constraint hypothesis lacks information why ‘consolation’ actually happens. Here, we combine a computational model and an empirical study to investigate the minimum cognitive requirements for post-conflict affiliation. In the individual-based model, individuals are steered by cognitively simple behavioural rules. Individuals group and when nearby each other they fight if they are likely to win, otherwise, they may groom, especially when anxious. We parameterize the model after empirical data of a tolerant species, the Tonkean macaque (Macaca tonkeana). We find evidence for the four categories of post-conflict affiliation in the model and in the empirical data. We explain how in the model these patterns emerge from the combination of a weak hierarchy, social facilitation, risk-sensitive aggression, interactions with partners close-by and grooming as tension-reduction mechanism. We indicate how this may function as a new explanation for empirical data.
Highlights
Complex explanations have been given for many aspects of social behaviour in primates
We use a combination of a computer model ‘GrooFiWorld’ based on self-organisation [1] and empirical data of a tolerant species of macaques, Tonkean macaques (Macaca tonkeana) to investigate what mechanisms may underly the occurrence of four forms of post-conflict affiliation between former opponents of a fight and bystanders, namely ‘appeasement’, which is when the former aggressor receives affiliation, ‘consolation’ when the former victim receives it, ‘solicited appeasement’ when the former aggressor solicits affiliation from a bystander, and ‘solicited consolation’ when the former victim solicits it
Consolation was found to occur in apes but not in monkeys. This result has been interpreted as indicating a constraint of the cognitive capacity of monkeys, i.e. the cognitive constraint hypothesis [9]
Summary
Complex explanations have been given for many aspects of social behaviour in primates. In species with a tolerant dominance style the risks of further aggression after a conflict are lower than in species with an intolerant dominance style, making such affiliation more likely In line with this is the fact that the only monkey species in which consolation has been confirmed are species that are tolerant, namely the stump-tailed (M. arctoides) and Barbary macaques (M. sylvanus) [15,16,17,18]. This hypothesis, does not explain why such affiliative postconflict behaviour happens in the first place
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
