4.2 Article

Benefiting friends or dominants: prosocial choices mainly depend on rank position in long-tailed macaques (Macaca fascicularis)

Journal

PRIMATES
Volume 52, Issue 3, Pages 237-247

Publisher

SPRINGER JAPAN KK
DOI: 10.1007/s10329-011-0244-8

Keywords

Prosociality; Friendship; Relationship quality; Long-tailed macaques; Rank relations

Categories

Funding

  1. The Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Long-term observational studies in a number of animal species suggest that exchange patterns of social acts depend on long-term emotional bonds. Therefore, it is expected that the frequency of prosocial behavior will depend on the strength of such a bond. In this study we tested whether variation in relationship quality among unrelated individuals, i.e., friends and nonfriends, is predictive of the prosocial behavior of long-tailed macaques in two experiments. First, we related relationship quality to prosociality in a dyadic prosociality test, and second, we gave subjects the choice to give to either a friend or a nonfriend in a triadic choice test. We show that prosocial behavior of long-tailed macaques in the dyadic test is not related to relationship quality. When given the choice to give to either a friend or a nonfriend in the triadic test, there is a minor indication that long-tailed macaques show a preference to give to their friends, yet this indication is neither significant nor consistent. In contrast, subordinate long-tailed macaques make a more competitive choice and avoid giving to the individual closest in rank. Therefore, in the short-term situation of experimental tests, prosocial behavior of long-tailed macaques seems unaffected by the relationship quality of the dyad/triad tested, and the relative dominance position of these dyads/triads seems to have a much stronger effect on their prosocial behavior.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available