Abstract

Living in permanent social groups forces animals to make decisions about when, how and with whom to interact, requiring decisions to be made that integrate multiple sources of information. Changing social environments can influence this decision-making process by constraining choice or altering the likelihood of a positive outcome. Here, we conceptualized grooming as a choice situation where an individual chooses one of a number of potential partners. Studying two wild populations of sympatric primate species, sooty mangabeys (Cercocebus atys atys) and western chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes verus), we tested what properties of potential partners influenced grooming decisions, including their relative value based on available alternatives and the social relationships of potential partners with bystanders who could observe the outcome of the decision. Across 1529 decision events, multiple partner attributes (e.g. dominance ranks, social relationship quality, reproductive state, partner sex) influenced choice. Individuals preferred to initiate grooming with partners of similar global rank, but this effect was driven by a bias towards partners with a high rank compared to other locally available options. Individuals also avoided grooming partners who had strong social relationships with at least one bystander. Results indicated flexible decision-making in grooming interactions in both species, based on a partner's value given the local social environment. Viewing partner choice as a value-based decision-making process allows researchers to compare how different species solve similar social problems.

Highlights

  • Animals living in social groups engage in competitive and cooperative social interactions with other group members

  • We conceptualized grooming as a decision-making event where individual chimpanzees and sooty mangabeys selected a partner from a group of available individuals

  • We found that multiple partner attributes had an impact on partner selection, and that the availability of alternative partners and their relationships influenced partner choice

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Animals living in social groups engage in competitive and cooperative social interactions with other group members. Each potential choice is associated with specific benefits (e.g. access to resources partner can offer [5,10]), costs (e.g. time invested by the donor [11]) and risks (e.g. likelihood partner does not reciprocate [12]), which are in constant flux due to changing ecological and social environment [13,14]. This suggests that flexibly adapting their decision-making process based on changing social and ecological conditions might enable animals to maximize fitness benefits from choosing a cooperation partner

Methods
Results
Conclusion

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 call

Disclaimer: 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.