Cooperative problem solving in a cooperatively breeding primate (Saguinus oedipus)

Marmosets mutually compensate for differences in rhythms when coordinating vigilance

Synchronization is widespread in animals, and studies have often emphasized how this seemingly complex phenomenon can emerge from very simple rules. However, the amount of flexibility and control that animals might have over synchronization properties, such as the strength of coupling, remains underexplored. Here, we studied how pairs of marmoset monkeys coordinated vigilance while feeding. By modeling them as coupled oscillators, we noted that (1) individual marmosets do not show perfect periodicity in vigilance behaviors, (2) nevertheless, marmoset pairs started to take turns being vigilant over time, a case of anti-phase synchrony, (3) marmosets could couple flexibly; the coupling strength varied with every new joint feeding bout, and (4) marmosets could control the coupling strength; dyads showed increased coupling if they began in a more desynchronized state. Such flexibility and control over synchronization require more than simple interaction rules. Minimally, animals must estimate the current degree of asynchrony and adjust their behavior accordingly. Moreover, the fact that each marmoset is inherently non-periodic adds to the cognitive demand. Overall, our study provides a mathematical framework to investigate the cognitive demands involved in coordinating behaviors in animals, regardless of whether individual behaviors are rhythmic or not.

Development of a Marmoset Apparatus for Automated Pulling (MarmoAAP) to Study Cooperative Behaviors

In recent years, the field of neuroscience has increasingly recognized the importance of studying animal behaviors in naturalistic environments to gain deeper insights into ethologically relevant behavioral processes and neural mechanisms. The common marmoset (Callithrix jacchus), due to its small size, prosocial nature, and genetic proximity to humans, has emerged as a pivotal model toward this effort. However, traditional research methodologies often fail to fully capture the nuances of marmoset social interactions and cooperative behaviors. To address this critical gap, we developed the Marmoset Apparatus for Automated Pulling (MarmoAAP), a novel behavioral apparatus designed for studying cooperative behaviors in common marmosets. MarmoAAP addresses the limitations of traditional behavioral research methods by enabling high-throughput, detailed behavior outputs that can be integrated with video and audio recordings, allowing for more nuanced and comprehensive analyses even in a naturalistic setting. We also highlight the flexibility of MarmoAAP in task parameter manipulation which accommodates a wide range of behaviors and individual animal capabilities. Furthermore, MarmoAAP provides a platform to perform investigations of neural activity underlying naturalistic social behaviors. MarmoAAP is a versatile and robust tool for advancing our understanding of primate behavior and related cognitive processes. This new apparatus bridges the gap between ethologically relevant animal behavior studies and neural investigations, paving the way for future research in cognitive and social neuroscience using marmosets as a model organism.

A cooperation experiment with white-handed gibbons (Hylobates lar)

Cooperative behaviors among individuals of numerous species play a crucial role in social interactions. There is a special interest in investigating the occurrence of cooperation among apes because this knowledge could also shed light on evolutionary processes and help us understand the origin and development of cooperation in humans and primates in general. Gibbons are phylogenetically intermediate between the great apes and monkeys, and therefore represent a unique opportunity for comparisons. The aim of the present study was to discover whether or not white-handed gibbons (Hylobates lar) show cooperative behaviors. In order to test for the respective behaviors, the gibbons were presented with a commonly used experimental cooperative rope-pulling task. The gibbons in this study did not exhibit cooperative behaviors during the problem-solving task. However, prior training procedures could not be fully completed, hence this project constitutes only the onset of exploring cooperative behaviors in gibbons. Additional behavioral observations revealed that the gibbons spent significantly more time "out of arm's reach to everyone", suggesting that they are less often involved in social interactions, than other, more cooperative primates.

Cooperation increases bottlenose dolphins' (Tursiops truncatus) social affiliation

Dolphins live in a fission-fusion society, where strong social bonds and alliances can last for decades. However, the mechanism that allows dolphins to form such strong social bonds is still unclear. Here, we hypothesized the existence of a positive feedback mechanism in which social affiliation promotes dolphins' cooperation, which in turn promotes their social affiliation. To test it, we stimulated the cooperation of the 11 dolphins studied by providing a cooperative enrichment tool based on a rope-pulling task to access a resource. Then we measured the social affiliation [simple ratio index (SRI)] of each possible pair of dolphins and evaluated whether it increased after cooperation. We also evaluated whether, before cooperation, pairs that cooperated had a higher SRI than those that did not cooperate. Our findings showed that the 11 cooperating pairs had significantly stronger social affiliation before cooperation than the 15 non-cooperating pairs. Furthermore, cooperating pairs significantly increased their social affiliation after cooperation, while non-cooperating pairs did not. As a result, our findings provide support to our hypothesis, and suggest that the previous social affiliation between dolphins facilitates cooperation, which in turn promotes their social affiliation.

On the interplay of hierarchies, conflicts, and cooperation: An experimental approach

Previous research suggests that it is difficult to maintain cooperation in a large society when there is a strong hierarchical structure. In this study, we implement online human experiments to study the effects of exogenous variation in a particular notion of hierarchy on cooperation and conflict within groups. We demonstrate how cooperation can be maintained when collective action is accompanied by dyadic conflicts whose outcome feeds back on the hierarchical rank of the contestants. We find that the majority of individuals take part in conflicts and that highly ranked individuals mostly cooperate and engage in conflicts as a way to punish noncooperators. As a consequence, stable hierarchical groups can arise and maintain high levels of cooperation. Our results are in agreement with the prediction of earlier theoretical models on hierarchical societies and are relevant to understanding the interplay of hierarchy, cooperation, and conflict.

The primate workplace: Cooperative decision-making in human and non-human primates

The success of group foraging in primates is not only determined by ecological and social factors. It is also influenced by cognition. Group foraging success is constrained, for instance, by the challenges of coordination, synchrony and decision-making, and it is enhanced by the ability to share, learn from others and coordinate actions. However, what we currently know about the cognition of individuals in groups comes primarily from experiments on dyads, and what we know of the effect of ecological factors on group dynamics comes from larger wild groups. Our current knowledge of primate group behaviour is thus incomplete. In this review, we identify a gap in our knowledge of primate group dynamics between the dyadic studies on primate cooperation and the large group observational studies of behavioural ecology. We highlight the potential for controlled experimental studies on coordination and cooperation in primate groups. Currently, these exist primarily as studies of dyads, and these do not go far enough in testing limits of group-level behaviours. Controlled studies on primate groups beyond the dyad would be highly informative regarding the bounds of non-human primate collaboration. We look to the literature on how humans behave in groups, specifically from organisational psychology, draw parallels between human and non-human group dynamics and highlight approaches that could be applied across disciplines. Organisational psychology is explicitly concerned with the interactions between individuals in a group and the emergent properties at the group-level of these decisions. We propose that some of the major shortfalls in our understanding of primate social cognition and group dynamics can be filled by using approaches developed by organisational psychologists, particularly regarding the effects of group size and composition on group-level cooperation. To illustrate the potential applications, we provide a list of research questions drawn from organisational psychology that could be applied to non-human primates.

Exploring the Cognitive Capacities of Japanese Macaques in a Cooperation Game

Simple Summary

Experiments using animal models are often conducted to explore the cognitive capacities of different species and to shed light upon the evolution of behavior and the mind that shapes it. Investigating the cognitions and motivations involved in cooperation is one such area that has attracted attention in recent years. As experiments examining these abilities in natural settings are underrepresented in the literature, our study was conducted in a setting closely resembling the natural environment of the study species so as to retain the social factors that help shape these behaviors. In our experiments, Japanese macaques needed to work together to simultaneously pull two loops in order to release food rewards onto a central platform. Over the course of the experiment, the macaques in our study came to make fewer attempts at the cooperative task when no potential partner was present. Furthermore, following an unequal division of the rewards, macaques receiving lesser rewards were more likely to express stress-related and aggressive behavior. Together, these results suggest that the Japanese macaques in our study understood the importance of having a partner in the cooperative task, paid attention to the relative value of the reward they received from the task and became distressed if their reward was inferior to that of another.

Abstract

Cooperation occurs amongst individuals embedded in a social environment. Consequently, cooperative interactions involve a variety of persistent social influences such as the dynamics of partner choice and reward division. To test for the effects of such dynamics, we conducted cooperation experiments in a captive population of Japanese macaques (Macaca fuscata, N = 164) using a modified version of the loose-string paradigm in an open-experiment design. We show that in addition to becoming more proficient cooperators over the course of the experiments, some of the macaques showed sensitivity to the presence of potential partners and adjusted their behavior accordingly. Furthermore, following an unequal reward division, individuals receiving a lesser reward were more likely to display aggressive and stress-related behaviors. Our experiments demonstrate that Japanese macaques have some understanding of the contingencies involved in cooperation as well as a sensitivity to the subsequent reward division suggestive of an aversion to inequity.

Kea, Nestor notabilis, achieve cooperation in dyads, triads, and tetrads when dominants show restraint

Animal cooperation in the wild often involves multiple individuals that must tolerate each other in close proximity. However, most cooperation experiments in the lab are done with two animals, that are often also physically separated. Such experiments are useful for answering some pertinent questions, for example about the understanding of the role of the partner and strategies of partner control, but say little about factors determining successful cooperation with multiple partners in group settings. We explored the influence of dominance, rank distance, tolerance, affiliation, and coordination by testing kea parrots with a box requiring two, three, or four chains to be pulled simultaneously to access food rewards. The reward could be divided unevenly, but not monopolized completely. Eventually dyadic, triadic, and tetradic cooperation tasks were solved, showing that non-human animals are capable of tetradic cooperation in an experimental setup. Starting with two chains, we found that in a dyad monopolization of the box by the highest-ranking bird was the largest obstacle preventing successful cooperation. High-ranking birds learned to restrain themselves from monopolizing the box during a single session in which monopolization was hindered by the presence of a large number of birds. Thereafter, restraint by dominants remained the strongest factor determining success in the first trial in dyadic, triadic, and tetradic setups. The probability of success increased with the degree of restraint shown by all dominant subjects present. Previous experience with the task contributed to success in subsequent sessions, while increasing rank distance reduced success notably in the four-chain setup.

Cooperation, social norm internalization, and hierarchical societies

Many animal and human societies exhibit hierarchical structures with different degrees of steepness. Some of these societies also show cooperative behavior, where cooperation means working together for a common benefit. However, there is an increasing evidence that rigidly enforced hierarchies lead to a decrease of cooperation in both human and non-human primates. In this work, we address this issue by means of an evolutionary agent-based model that incorporates fights as social interactions governing a dynamic ranking, communal work to produce a public good, and norm internalization, i.e. a process where acting according to a norm becomes a goal in itself. Our model also includes the perception of how much the individual is going to retain from her cooperative behavior in future interactions. The predictions of the model resemble the principal characteristics of human societies. When ranking is unconstrained, we observe a high concentration of agents in low scores, while a few ones climb up the social hierarchy and exploit the rest, with no norm internalization. If ranking is constrained, thus leading to bounded score differences between agents, individual positions in the ranking change more, and the typical structure shows a division of the society in upper and lower classes. In this case, we observe that there is a significant degree of norm internalization, supporting large fractions of the population cooperating in spite of the rank differences. Our main results are robust with respect to the model parameters and to the type of rank constraint. We thus provide a mechanism that can explain how hierarchy arises in initially egalitarian societies while keeping a large degree of cooperation.

How animals collaborate: Underlying proximate mechanisms

Collaboration or social interactions in which two or more individuals coordinate their behavior to produce outcomes from which both individuals benefit are common in nature. Individuals from many species hunt together, defend their territory, and form coalitions in intragroup competition. However, we still know very little about the proximate mechanisms underlying these behaviors. Recent theories of human cognitive evolution have emphasized the role collaboration may have played in the selection of socio-cognitive skills. It has been argued that the capacity to form shared goals and joint intentions with others, is what allows humans to collaborate so flexibly and efficiently. Although there is no evidence that nonhuman animals are capable of shared intentionality, there is conceivably a wide range of proximate mechanisms that support forms of, potentially flexible, collaboration in other species. We review the experimental literature with the aim of evaluating what we know about how other species achieve collaboration; with a particular focus on chimpanzees. We structure the review with a new categorization of collaborative behavior that focuses on whether individuals intentionally coordinate actions with others. We conclude that for a wider comparative perspective we need more data from other species but the findings so far suggest that chimpanzees, and possibly other great apes, are capable of understanding the causal role of a partner in collaboration. This article is categorized under: Cognitive Biology > Evolutionary Roots of Cognition Psychology > Comparative Psychology.

Gorillas' (Gorilla g. gorilla) knowledge of conspecifics' affordances: intraspecific social tool use for food acquisition

The use of tools, long thought to be uniquely human, has now been observed in other animal taxa including several species of birds, non-primate mammals as well as some non-human primate species. Chimpanzees, one of humankind’s closest living relatives, exceed all other non-human animal species as they have been reported to use an exceptionally large toolkit. However, relatively little is known about the tool-use skills of the other great ape species. While the majority of tools described are inanimate objects, the use of social tools has received relatively little attention. Here we provide the first evidence of naturally occurring spontaneous exploitative behaviour of a conspecific as a social tool for food acquisition in non-human animals. We observed gorillas in captivity utilising a conspecific as a ladder to gain access to unreachable food. We discuss our findings in the light of other studies on social tool use and suggest the need for more nuanced interpretations of gorillas’ cognitive skills.

Responses to Economic Games of Cooperation and Conflict in Squirrel Monkeys (Saimiri boliviensis)

Games from experimental economics have provided insights into the evolutionary roots of social decision making in primates and other species. Multiple primate species' abilities to cooperate, coordinate and anti-coordinate have been tested utilizing variants of these simple games. Past research, however, has focused on species known to cooperate and coordinate in the wild. To begin to address the degree to which cooperation and coordination may be a general ability that manifests in specific contexts, the present study assessed the decisions of squirrel monkeys (Saimiri boliviensis; N = 10), a species not known for their cooperative behavior in these games. Pairs of monkeys were presented with the Assurance Game (a coordination game), the Hawk-Dove Game (an anti-coordination game) and the Prisoner's Dilemma (a cooperation game with a temptation to defect). We then compared squirrel monkeys' performance to existing data on capuchin monkeys (Sapajus [Cebus] apella), a closely related species that routinely cooperates, to determine what, if any, differences in decision making emerged. Some pairs of both species found the payoff-dominant Nash Equilibrium (NE) in the coordination game, but failed to find the NE in subsequent games. Our results suggest that, like capuchins, squirrel monkeys coordinate their behavior with others, suggesting that such mutual outcomes occur in at least some contexts, even in species that do not routinely cooperate.

Collaborative hierarchy maintains cooperation in asymmetric games

The interplay of social structure and cooperative behavior is under much scrutiny lately as behavior in social contexts becomes increasingly relevant for everyday life. Earlier experimental work showed that the existence of a social hierarchy, earned through competition, was detrimental for the evolution of cooperative behaviors. Here, we study the case in which individuals are ranked in a hierarchical structure based on their performance in a collective effort by having them play a Public Goods Game. In the first treatment, participants are ranked according to group earnings while, in the second treatment, their rankings are based on individual earnings. Subsequently, participants play asymmetric Prisoner’s Dilemma games where higher-ranked players gain more than lower ones. Our experiments show that there are no detrimental effects of the hierarchy formed based on group performance, yet when ranking is assigned individually we observe a decrease in cooperation. Our results show that different levels of cooperation arise from the fact that subjects are interpreting rankings as a reputation which carries information about which subjects were cooperators in the previous phase. Our results demonstrate that noting the manner in which a hierarchy is established is essential for understanding its effects on cooperation.

Primate empathy: three factors and their combinations for empathy-related phenomena

Empathy as a research topic is receiving increasing attention, although there seems some confusion on the definition of empathy across different fields. Frans de Waal (de Waal FBM. Putting the altruism back into altruism: the evolution of empathy. Annu Rev Psychol 2008, 59:279-300. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093625) used empathy as an umbrella term and proposed a comprehensive model for the evolution of empathy with some of its basic elements in nonhuman animals. In de Waal's model, empathy consists of several layers distinguished by required cognitive levels; the perception-action mechanism plays the core role for connecting ourself and others. Then, human-like empathy such as perspective-taking develops in outer layers according to cognitive sophistication, leading to prosocial acts such as targeted helping. I agree that animals demonstrate many empathy-related phenomena; however, the species differences and the level of cognitive sophistication of the phenomena might be interpreted in another way than this simple linearly developing model. Our recent studies with chimpanzees showed that their perspective-taking ability does not necessarily lead to proactive helping behavior. Herein, as a springboard for further studies, I reorganize the empathy-related phenomena by proposing a combination model instead of the linear development model. This combination model is composed of three organizing factors: matching with others, understanding of others, and prosociality. With these three factors and their combinations, most empathy-related matters can be categorized and mapped to appropriate context; this may be a good first step to discuss the evolution of empathy in relation to the neural connections in human and nonhuman animal brains. I would like to propose further comparative studies, especially from the viewpoint of Homo-Pan (chimpanzee and bonobo) comparison. WIREs Cogn Sci 2017, 8:e1431. doi: 10.1002/wcs.1431 For further resources related to this article, please visit the WIREs website.

Kea cooperate better with sharing affiliates

Controlled studies that focus on intraspecific cooperation tasks have revealed striking similarities, but also differences, in abilities across taxa as diverse as primates, fish, and birds. Such comparisons may provide insight into the specific socio-ecological selection pressures that led to the evolution of cooperation. Unfortunately, however, compared to primates data on birds remain relatively scarce. We tested a New Zealand psittaciform, the kea, in a dyadic cooperation task using the loose-string design. During trials our subjects were in separate compartments, but obtained a common reward that could be divided multiple ways, allowing the examination of reward division effects. Ten individuals were tested twice in 44 combinations of partners. Dyads with a high affiliation score attempted to cooperate more often and were also more often successful in doing so. Furthermore, dyads that shared rewards more equally seemed to be more likely to attempt cooperation in the next trial. Like other bird and some monkey species, but unlike, for example, chimpanzees, kea did not spontaneously show understanding of either the role of the partner or the mechanism behind the cooperation task. This may point to true disparities between species, but may also be due to differences in task design and/or the amount of exposure to similar tasks and individual skills of the subjects.

Social manipulation in nonhuman primates: Cognitive and motivational determinants

Social interactions are the result of individuals' cooperative and competitive tendencies expressed over an extended period of time. Although social manipulation, i.e., using another individual to achieve one's own goals, is a crucial aspect of social interactions, there has been no comprehensive attempt to differentiate its various types and to map its cognitive and motivational determinants. For this purpose, we survey in this article the experimental literature on social interactions in nonhuman primates. We take social manipulation, illustrated by a case study with orangutans (Pongo abelii), as our starting point and move in two directions. First, we will focus on a flexibility/sociality axis that includes technical problem solving, social tool-use and communication. Second, we will focus on a motivational/prosociality axis that includes exploitation, cooperation, and helping. Combined, the two axes offer a way to capture a broad range of social interactions performed by human and nonhuman primates.

Partner Choice in Raven (Corvus corax) Cooperation

Although social animals frequently make decisions about when or with whom to cooperate, little is known about the underlying mechanisms of partner choice. Most previous studies compared different dyads’ performances, though did not allow an actual choice among partners. We tested eleven ravens, Corvus corax, in triads, giving them first the choice to cooperate with either a highly familiar or a rather unfamiliar partner and, second, with either a friend or a non-friend using a cooperative string-pulling task. In either test, the ravens had a second choice and could cooperate with the other partner, given that this one had not pulled the string in the meantime. We show that during the experiments, these partner ravens indeed learn to wait and inhibit pulling, respectively. Moreover, the results of these two experiments show that ravens’ preferences for a specific cooperation partner are not based on familiarity. In contrast, the ravens did show a preference based on relationship quality, as they did choose to cooperate significantly more with friends than with non-friends and they were also more proficient when cooperating with a friend. In order to further identify the proximate mechanism of this preference, we designed an open-choice experiment for the whole group where all birds were free to cooperate on two separate apparatuses. This set-up allowed us to distinguish between preferences for close proximity and preferences to cooperate. The results revealed that friends preferred staying close to each other, but did not necessarily cooperate with one another, suggesting that tolerance of proximity and not relationship quality as a whole may be the driving force behind partner choice in raven cooperation. Consequently, we stress the importance of experiments that allow such titrations and, suggest that these results have important implications for the interpretations of cooperation studies that did not include open partner choice.

Acoustic behavior associated with cooperative task success in bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus)

Although many species have proven capable of cooperating to achieve common goals, the role of communication in cooperation has received relatively little attention. Analysis of communication between partners is vital in determining whether actions are truly cooperative rather than serendipitous or learned via trial and error (Chalmeau and Gallo in Behav Process 35:101-111, 1996a. doi: 10.1016/0376-6357(95)00049-6 , Primates 37:39-47, 1996b. doi: 10.1007/BF02382918 ). Wild cetaceans often produce sounds during cooperative foraging, playing, and mating, but the role of these sounds in cooperative events is largely unknown. Here, we investigated acoustic communication between two male bottlenose dolphins while they cooperatively opened a container (Kuczaj et al. in Anim Cogn 18:543-550, 2015b. doi: 10.1007/s10071-014-0822-4 ). Analyses of whistles, burst pulses, and bi-phonations that occurred during four contexts (i.e., no container, no animals interacting with container, one animal interacting with container, and two animals interacting with container) revealed that overall sound production rate significantly increased during container interactions. Sound production rates were also significantly higher during cooperative successes than solo successes, suggesting that the coordination of efforts rather than the apparatus itself was responsible for the phonation increase. The most common sound type during cooperative successes was burst pulse signals, similar to past recordings of cooperative events in bottlenose dolphins (Bastian in Animal sonar systems. Laboratoire de Physiologie Acoustique, Jouy-en Josas, pp 803-873, 1967; Connor and Smolker 1996).

Hierarchy is Detrimental for Human Cooperation

Studies of animal behavior consistently demonstrate that the social environment impacts cooperation, yet the effect of social dynamics has been largely excluded from studies of human cooperation. Here, we introduce a novel approach inspired by nonhuman primate research to address how social hierarchies impact human cooperation. Participants competed to earn hierarchy positions and then could cooperate with another individual in the hierarchy by investing in a common effort. Cooperation was achieved if the combined investments exceeded a threshold, and the higher ranked individual distributed the spoils unless control was contested by the partner. Compared to a condition lacking hierarchy, cooperation declined in the presence of a hierarchy due to a decrease in investment by lower ranked individuals. Furthermore, hierarchy was detrimental to cooperation regardless of whether it was earned or arbitrary. These findings mirror results from nonhuman primates and demonstrate that hierarchies are detrimental to cooperation. However, these results deviate from nonhuman primate findings by demonstrating that human behavior is responsive to changing hierarchical structures and suggests partnership dynamics that may improve cooperation. This work introduces a controlled way to investigate the social influences on human behavior, and demonstrates the evolutionary continuity of human behavior with other primate species.

Functional analysis of mutual behavior in laboratory rats (Rattus norvegicus)

Three pairs of rats were trained to synchronize their lever pressing according to a mutual reinforcement contingency, in which alternating lever presses that fell within a 500-ms window were reinforced with food. In Experiment 1, rats worked in adjacent chambers separated by a transparent barrier, and the effects of the mutual reinforcement contingency were compared with those under yoked-control conditions that provided the same rate of food reinforcement but without the temporal coordination response requirement. In Experiment 2, coordinated behavior was compared with and without a barrier, and across different barrier types: transparent, opaque, wire mesh. In Experiment 3, the effects of social familiarity were assessed by switching partners, enabling a comparison of coordinated behavior with familiar and unfamiliar partners. The overall pattern of results shows that the coordinated behavior of 2 rats was (a) maintained by mutual reinforcement contingencies, (b) unrelated to the type or presence of a barrier separating the rats, and (c) sufficiently flexible to adjust to the presence and behavior of an unfamiliar partner. Taken as a whole, the study illustrates a promising approach to conceptualizing and analyzing behavioral mechanisms of mutual behavior, an important component of an integrated study of social behavior.

Tolerance and reward equity predict cooperation in ravens (Corvus corax)

Cooperative decision rules have so far been shown experimentally mainly in mammal species that have variable and complex social networks. However, these traits should not necessarily be restricted to mammals. Therefore, we tested cooperative problem solving in ravens. We showed that, without training, nine ravens spontaneously cooperated in a loose-string task. Corroborating findings in several species, ravens’ cooperative success increased with increasing inter-individual tolerance levels. Importantly, we found this in both a forced dyadic setting, and in a group setting where individuals had an open choice to cooperate with whomever. The ravens, moreover, also paid attention to the resulting reward distribution and ceased cooperation when being cheated upon. Nevertheless, the ravens did not seem to pay attention to the behavior of their partners while cooperating, and future research should reveal whether this is task specific or a general pattern. Given their natural propensity to cooperate and the results we present here, we consider ravens as an interesting model species to study the evolution of, and the mechanisms underlying cooperation.

Cooperation in wild Barbary macaques: factors affecting free partner choice

A key aspect of cooperation is partner choice: choosing the best available partner improves the chances of a successful cooperative interaction and decreases the likelihood of being exploited. However, in studies on cooperation subjects are rarely allowed to freely choose their partners. Group-living animals live in a complex social environment where they can choose among several social partners differing in, for example, sex, age, temperament, or dominance status. Our study investigated whether wild Barbary macaques succeed to cooperate using an experimental apparatus, and whether individual and social factors affect their choice of partners and the degree of cooperation. We used the string pulling task that requires two monkeys to manipulate simultaneously a rope in order to receive a food reward. The monkeys were free to interact with the apparatus or not and to choose their partner. The results showed that Barbary macaques are able to pair up with a partner to cooperate using the apparatus. High level of tolerance between monkeys was necessary for the initiation of successful cooperation, while strong social bond positively affected the maintenance of cooperative interactions. Dominance status, sex, age, and temperament of the subjects also affected their choice and performance. These factors thus need to be taken into account in cooperative experiment on animals. Tolerance between social partners is likely to be a prerequisite for the evolution of cooperation.

New Caledonian crows rapidly solve a collaborative problem without cooperative cognition

There is growing comparative evidence that the cognitive bases of cooperation are not unique to humans. However, the selective pressures that lead to the evolution of these mechanisms remain unclear. Here we show that while tool-making New Caledonian crows can produce collaborative behavior, they do not understand the causality of cooperation nor show sensitivity to inequity. Instead, the collaborative behavior produced appears to have been underpinned by the transfer of prior experience. These results suggest that a number of possible selective pressures, including tool manufacture and mobbing behaviours, have not led to the evolution of cooperative cognition in this species. They show that causal cognition can evolve in a domain specific manner–understanding the properties and flexible uses of physical tools does not necessarily enable animals to grasp that a conspecific can be used as a social tool.

Ape duos and trios: spontaneous cooperation with free partner choice in chimpanzees

The purpose of the present study was to push the boundaries of cooperation among captive chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). There has been doubt about the level of cooperation that chimpanzees are able to spontaneously achieve or understand. Would they, without any pre-training or restrictions in partner choice, be able to develop successful joint action? And would they be able to extend cooperation to more than two partners, as they do in nature? Chimpanzees were given a chance to cooperate with multiple partners of their own choosing. All members of the group (N = 11) had simultaneous access to an apparatus that required two (dyadic condition) or three (triadic condition) individuals to pull in a tray baited with food. Without any training, the chimpanzees spontaneously solved the task a total of 3,565 times in both dyadic and triadic combinations. Their success rate and efficiency increased over time, whereas the amount of pulling in the absence of a partner decreased, demonstrating that they had learned the task contingencies. They preferentially approached the apparatus when kin or nonkin of similar rank were present, showing a preference for socially tolerant partners. The forced partner combinations typical of cooperation experiments cannot reveal these abilities, which demonstrate that in the midst of a complex social environment, chimpanzees spontaneously initiate and maintain a high level of cooperative behavior.

Problem solving in the presence of others: how rank and relationship quality impact resource acquisition in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes)

In the wild, chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) are often faced with clumped food resources that they may know how to access but abstain from doing so due to social pressures. To better understand how social settings influence resource acquisition, we tested fifteen semi-wild chimpanzees from two social groups alone and in the presence of others. We investigated how resource acquisition was affected by relative social dominance, whether collaborative problem solving or (active or passive) sharing occurred amongst any of the dyads, and whether these outcomes were related to relationship quality as determined from six months of observational data. Results indicated that chimpanzees obtained fewer rewards when tested in the presence of others compared to when they were tested alone, and this loss tended to be greater when paired with a higher ranked individual. Individuals demonstrated behavioral inhibition; chimpanzees who showed proficient skill when alone often abstained from solving the task when in the presence of others. Finally, individuals with close social relationships spent more time together in the problem solving space, but collaboration and sharing were infrequent and sessions in which collaboration or sharing did occur contained more instances of aggression. Group living provides benefits and imposes costs, and these findings highlight that one cost of group living may be diminishing productive individual behaviors.

A Hypothesis of the Co-evolution of Cooperation and Responses to Inequity

Recent evidence demonstrates that humans are not the only species to respond negatively to inequitable outcomes which are to their disadvantage. Several species respond negatively if they subsequently receive a less good reward than a social partner for completing the same task. While these studies suggest that the negative response to inequity is not a uniquely human behavior, they do not provide a functional explanation for the emergence of these responses due to similar characteristics among these species. However, emerging data support the hypothesis that an aversion to inequity is a mechanism to promote successful long-term cooperative relationships amongst non-kin. In this paper, I discuss several converging lines of evidence which illustrate the need to further evaluate this relationship. First, cooperation can survive modest inequity; in explicitly cooperative interactions, individuals are willing to continue to cooperate despite inequitable outcomes as long as the partner's overall behavior is equitable. Second, the context of inequity affects reactions to it in ways which support the idea that joint efforts lead to an expectation of joint payoffs. Finally, comparative studies indicate a link between the degree and extent of cooperation between unrelated individuals in a species and that species’ response to inequitable outcomes. This latter line of evidence indicates that this behavior evolved in conjunction with cooperation and may represent an adaptation to increase the payoffs associated with cooperative interactions. Together these data inform a testable working hypothesis for understanding decision-making in the context of inequity and provide a new, comparative framework for evaluating decision-making behavior.

Cooperative problem solving in African grey parrots (Psittacus erithacus)

One of the main characteristics of human societies is the extensive degree of cooperation among individuals. Cooperation is an elaborate phenomenon, also found in non-human primates during laboratory studies and field observations of animal hunting behaviour, among other things. Some authors suggest that the pressures assumed to have favoured the emergence of social intelligence in primates are similar to those that may have permitted the emergence of complex cognitive abilities in some bird species such as corvids and psittacids. In the wild, parrots show cooperative behaviours such as bi-parental care and mobbing. In this study, we tested cooperative problem solving in African grey parrots (Psittacus erithacus). Our birds were tested using several experimental setups to explore the different levels of behavioural organisation between participants, differing in temporal and spatial complexity. In our experiments, African grey parrots were able to act simultaneously but mostly failed during the delay task, maybe because of a lack of inhibitory motor response. Confronted with the possibility to adapt their behaviour to the presence or absence of a partner, they showed that they were able to coordinate their actions. They also collaborated, acting complementarily in order to solve tasks, but they were not able to place themselves in the partner's role.

Prosocial primates: selfish and unselfish motivations

Non-human primates are marked by well-developed prosocial and cooperative tendencies as reflected in the way they support each other in fights, hunt together, share food and console victims of aggression. The proximate motivation behind such behaviour is not to be confused with the ultimate reasons for its evolution. Even if a behaviour is ultimately self-serving, the motivation behind it may be genuinely unselfish. A sharp distinction needs to be drawn, therefore, between (i) altruistic and cooperative behaviour with knowable benefits to the actor, which may lead actors aware of these benefits to seek them by acting cooperatively or altruistically and (ii) altruistic behaviour that offers the actor no knowable rewards. The latter is the case if return benefits occur too unpredictably, too distantly in time or are of an indirect nature, such as increased inclusive fitness. The second category of behaviour can be explained only by assuming an altruistic impulse, which-as in humans-may be born from empathy with the recipient's need, pain or distress. Empathy, a proximate mechanism for prosocial behaviour that makes one individual share another's emotional state, is biased the way one would predict from evolutionary theories of cooperation (i.e. by kinship, social closeness and reciprocation). There is increasing evidence in non-human primates (and other mammals) for this proximate mechanism as well as for the unselfish, spontaneous nature of the resulting prosocial tendencies. This paper further reviews observational and experimental evidence for the reciprocity mechanisms that underlie cooperation among non-relatives, for inequity aversion as a constraint on cooperation and on the way defection is dealt with.

How is human cooperation different?

Although cooperation is a widespread phenomenon in nature, human cooperation exceeds that of all other species with regard to the scale and range of cooperative activities. Here we review and discuss differences between humans and non-humans in the strategies employed to maintain cooperation and control free-riders. We distinguish forms of cooperative behaviour based on their influence on the immediate payoffs of actor and recipient. If the actor has immediate costs and only the recipient obtains immediate benefits, we term this investment. If the behaviour has immediate positive effects for both actor and recipient, we call this a self-serving mutually beneficial behaviour or mutual cooperation. We argue that humans, in contrast to all other species, employ a wider range of enforcement mechanisms, which allow higher levels of cooperation to evolve and stabilize among unrelated individuals and in large groups. We also discuss proximate mechanisms underlying cooperative behaviour and focus on our experimental work with humans and our closest primate relatives. Differences in the proximate mechanisms also seem to contribute to explaining humans' greater ability to cooperate and enforce cooperation.

The performance of rooks in a cooperative task depends on their temperament

In recent years, an increasing number of studies demonstrated the existence of consistent individual differences in behaviour, often referred to as differences in temperament or personality, in a wide range of animal species. There notably is a growing body of evidence showing that individuals differ in their propensity for risk taking or reacting to stressful situations. This variation has been related to differences in learning abilities or performance in cognitive tasks. In the present study, we examined the consequences of inter-individual variation in boldness on performance in a cooperative task in rooks (Corvus frugilegus). Birds were tested individually to measure a number of behavioural parameters related to boldness. The level of a stress-related hormone, corticosterone, in the faeces of each bird was measured under control conditions and after a stress-provoking event. In parallel, we conducted a cooperative string pulling task in which birds were tested in dyads. Successful cooperation depended to a large extent on the temperament of the two partners involved. Temperament, in turn, correlated well with corticosterone levels under stress. Bolder individuals appeared to be more willing to participate in the task, whereas shyer individuals were more influenced by the behaviour of their partner. These findings suggest that a rook's temperament can limit its options of forming successfully cooperating partnerships under stressful conditions.

Cognitive consequences of cooperative breeding in primates?

Several hypotheses propose that cooperative breeding leads to increased cognitive performance, in both nonhuman and human primates, but systematic evidence for such a relationship is missing. A causal link might exist because motivational and cognitive processes necessary for the execution and coordination of helping behaviors could also favor cognitive performance in contexts not directly related to caregiving. In callitrichids, which among primates rely most strongly on cooperative breeding, these motivational and cognitive processes include attentional biases toward monitoring others, the ability to coordinate actions spatially and temporally, increased social tolerance, increased responsiveness to others' signals, and spontaneous prosociality. These processes are likely to enhance performance particularly in socio-cognitive contexts. Therefore, cooperatively breeding primates are expected to outperform their independently breeding sister taxa in socio-cognitive tasks. We evaluate this prediction by reviewing the literature and comparing cognitive performance in callitrichids with that of their sister taxa, i.e. squirrel monkeys, which are independent breeders, and capuchin monkeys, which show an intermediate breeding system. Consistent with our prediction, this review reveals that callitrichids systematically and significantly outperform their sister taxa in the socio-cognitive, but not in the non-social domain. This comparison is complemented with more qualitative evaluations of prosociality and cognitive performance in non-primate cooperative breeders, which suggest that among mammals, cooperative breeding generally produces conditions conducive to socio-cognitive performance. In the hominid lineage, however, the adoption of extensive allomaternal care presumably resulted in more pervasive cognitive consequences, because the motivational consequences of cooperative breeding was added to an ape-level cognitive system already capable of understanding simple mental states, which enabled the emergence of shared intentionality.

Capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) are sensitive to others' reward: an experimental analysis of food-choice for conspecifics

The issue whether non-human primates have other-regarding preference and/or inequity aversion has been under debate. We investigated whether tufted capuchin monkeys are sensitive to others' reward in various experimental food sharing settings. Two monkeys faced each other. The operator monkey chose one of two food containers placed between the participants, each containing a food item for him/herself and another for the recipient. The recipient passively received either high- or low-value food depending on the operator's choice, whereas the operator obtained the same food regardless of his/her choice. The recipients were either the highest- or lowest-ranking member of the group, and the operators were middle-ranking. In Experiment 1, the operators chose the high-value food for the subordinate recipient more frequently than when there was no recipient, whereas they were indifferent in their choice for the dominant. This differentiated behavior could have been because the dominant recipient frequently ate the low-value food. In Experiment 2, we increased the difference in the value of the two food items so that both recipients would reject the low-value food. The results were the same as in Experiment 1. In Experiment 3, we placed an opaque screen in front of the recipient to examine effects of visual contact between the participants. The operators' food choice generally shifted toward providing the low-value food for the recipient. These results suggest that capuchins are clearly sensitive to others' reward and that they show other-regarding preference or a form of inequity aversion depending upon the recipients and the presence of visual contact.

Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) do not develop contingent reciprocity in an experimental task

Chimpanzees provide help to unrelated individuals in a broad range of situations. The pattern of helping within pairs suggests that contingent reciprocity may have been an important mechanism in the evolution of altruism in chimpanzees. However, correlational analyses of the cumulative pattern of interactions over time do not demonstrate that helping is contingent upon previous acts of altruism, as required by the theory of reciprocal altruism. Experimental studies provide a controlled approach to examine the importance of contingency in helping interactions. In this study, we evaluated whether chimpanzees would be more likely to provide food to a social partner from their home group if their partner had previously provided food for them. The chimpanzees manipulated a barpull apparatus in which actors could deliver rewards either to themselves and their partners or only to themselves. Our findings indicate that the chimpanzees’ responses were not consistently influenced by the behavior of their partners in previous rounds. Only one of the 11 dyads that we tested demonstrated positive reciprocity. We conclude that contingent reciprocity does not spontaneously arise in experimental settings, despite the fact that patterns of behavior in the field indicate that individuals cooperate preferentially with reciprocating partners.