Do marmosets care to share? Oxytocin treatment reduces prosocial behavior toward strangers

Cooperatively-breeding and socially-monogamous primates, like marmosets and humans, exhibit high levels of social tolerance and prosociality toward others. Oxytocin (OXT) generally facilitates prosocial behavior, but there is growing recognition that OXT modulation of prosocial behavior is shaped by the context of social interactions and by other motivational states such as arousal or anxiety. To determine whether prosociality varies based on social context, we evaluated whether marmoset donors (Callithrix penicillata) preferentially rewarded pairmates versus opposite-sex strangers in a prosocial food-sharing task. To examine potential links among OXT, stress systems, and prosociality, we evaluated whether pretrial cortisol levels in marmosets altered the impact of OXT on prosocial responses. Marmosets exhibited spontaneous prosociality toward others, but they did so preferentially toward strangers compared to their pairmates. When donor marmosets were treated with marmoset-specific Pro⁸-OXT, they exhibited reduced prosociality toward strangers compared to marmosets treated with saline or consensus-mammalian Leu⁸-OXT. When pretrial cortisol levels were lower, marmosets exhibited higher prosociality toward strangers. These findings demonstrate that while marmosets show spontaneous prosocial responses toward others, they do so preferentially toward opposite-sex strangers. Cooperative breeding may be associated with the expression of prosociality, but the existence of a pair-bond between marmoset partners appears to be neither necessary nor sufficient for the expression of spontaneous prosocial responses. Furthermore, high prosociality toward strangers is significantly reduced in marmosets treated with Pro⁸-OXT, suggesting that OXT does not universally enhance prosociality, but, rather OXT modulation of prosocial behavior varies depending on social context.     

Tolerance allows bonobos to outperform chimpanzees on a cooperative task

To understand constraints on the evolution of cooperation, we compared the ability of bonobos and chimpanzees to cooperatively solve a food-retrieval problem. We addressed two hypotheses. The "emotional-reactivity hypothesis" predicts that bonobos will cooperate more successfully because tolerance levels are higher in bonobos. This prediction is inspired by studies of domesticated animals; such studies suggest that selection on emotional reactivity can influence the ability to solve social problems [1, 2]. In contrast, the "hunting hypothesis" predicts that chimpanzees will cooperate more successfully because only chimpanzees have been reported to cooperatively hunt in the wild [3-5]. We indexed emotional reactivity by measuring social tolerance while the animals were cofeeding and found that bonobos were more tolerant of cofeeding than chimpanzees. In addition, during cofeeding tests only bonobos exhibited socio-sexual behavior, and they played more. When presented with a task of retrieving food that was difficult to monopolize, bonobos and chimpanzees were equally cooperative. However, when the food reward was highly monopolizable, bonobos were more successful than chimpanzees at cooperating to retrieve it. These results support the emotional-reactivity hypothesis. Selection on temperament may in part explain the variance in cooperative ability across species, including hominoids.     

The evolution of daily food sharing: A Bayesian phylogenetic analysis

Some human subsistence economies are characterized by extensive daily food sharing networks, which may buffer the risk of shortfalls and facilitate cooperative production and divisions of labor among households. Comparative studies of human food sharing can assess the generalizability of this theory across time, space, and diverse lifeways. Here we test several predictions about daily sharing norms–which presumably reflect realized cooperative behavior–in a globally representative sample of nonindustrial societies (the Standard Cross-Cultural Sample), while controlling for multiple sources of autocorrelation among societies using Bayesian multilevel models. Consistent with a risk-buffering function, we find that sharing is less likely in societies with alternative means of smoothing production and consumption such as animal husbandry, food storage, and external trade. Further, food sharing was tightly linked to labor sharing, indicating gains to cooperative production and perhaps divisions of labor. We found a small phylogenetic signal for food sharing (captured by a supertree of human populations based on genetic and linguistic data) that was mediated by food storage and social stratification. Food sharing norms reliably emerge as part of cooperative economies across time and space but are culled by innovations that facilitate self-reliant production.     

The psychology of cooperation: Insights from chimpanzees and children

Across all cultures, humans engage in cooperative activities that can be as simple as preparing a meal or sharing food with others and as complex as playing in an orchestra or donating to charity. Although intraspecific cooperation exists among many other animal species, only humans engage in such a wide array of cooperative interaction and participate in large‐scale cooperation that extends beyond kin and even includes strangers.     

Tolerant food sharing and reciprocity is precluded by despotism among bonobos but not chimpanzees

Tolerant food sharing among human foragers can largely be explained by reciprocity. In contrast, food sharing among chimpanzees and bonobos may not always reflect reciprocity, which could be explained by different dominance styles: in egalitarian societies reciprocity is expressed freely, while in more despotic groups dominants may hinder reciprocity. We tested the degree of reciprocity and the influence of dominance on food sharing among chimpanzees and bonobos in two captive groups. First, we found that chimpanzees shared more frequently, more tolerantly, and more actively than bonobos. Second, among chimpanzees, food received was the best predictor of food shared, indicating reciprocal exchange, whereas among bonobos transfers were mostly unidirectional. Third, chimpanzees had a shallower and less linear dominance hierarchy, indicating that they were less despotic than bonobos. This suggests that the tolerant and reciprocal sharing found in chimpanzees, but not bonobos, was made possible by the absence of despotism. To investigate this further, we tested the relationship between despotism and reciprocity in grooming using data from an additional five groups and five different study periods on the main groups. The results showed that i) all chimpanzee groups were less despotic and groomed more reciprocally than bonobo groups, and ii) there was a general negative correlation between despotism and grooming reciprocity across species. This indicates that an egalitarian hierarchy may be more common in chimpanzees, at least in captivity, thus fostering reciprocal exchange. We conclude that a shallow dominance hierarchy was a necessary precondition for the evolution of human‐like reciprocal food sharing. Am J Phys Anthropol 143:41–51, 2010. © 2010 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Natural cooperators: Food sharing in humans and other primates

The study of cooperation is rich with theoretical models and laboratory experiments that have greatly advanced our knowledge of human uniqueness, but have sometimes lacked ecological validity. We therefore emphasize the need to tie discussions of human cooperation to the natural history of our species and its closest relatives, focusing on behavioral contexts best suited to reveal underlying selection pressures and evolved decision rules. 1 - 3 Food sharing is a fundamental form of cooperation that is well‐studied across primates and is particularly noteworthy because of its central role in shaping evolved human life history, social organization, and cooperative psychology. 1 - 16 Here we synthesize available evidence on food sharing in humans and other primates, tracing the origins of offspring provisioning, mutualism, trade, and reciprocity throughout the primate order. While primates may gain some benefits from sharing, humans, faced with more collective action problems in a risky foraging niche, expanded on primate patterns to buffer risk and recruit mates and allies through reciprocity and signaling, and established co‐evolving social norms of production and sharing. Differences in the necessity for sharing are reflected in differences in sharing psychology across species, thus helping to explain unique aspects of our evolved cooperative psychology.     

Prosocial behaviour emerges independent of reciprocity in cottontop tamarins

The cooperative breeding hypothesis posits that cooperatively breeding species are motivated to act prosocially, that is, to behave in ways that provide benefits to others, and that cooperative breeding has played a central role in the evolution of human prosociality. However, investigations of prosocial behaviour in cooperative breeders have produced varying results and the mechanisms contributing to this variation are unknown. We investigated whether reciprocity would facilitate prosocial behaviour among cottontop tamarins, a cooperatively breeding primate species likely to engage in reciprocal altruism, by comparing the number of food rewards transferred to partners who had either immediately previously provided or denied rewards to the subject. Subjects were also tested in a non-social control condition. Overall, results indicated that reciprocity increased food transfers. However, temporal analyses revealed that when the tamarins'' behaviour was evaluated in relation to the non-social control, results were best explained by (i) an initial depression in the transfer of rewards to partners who recently denied rewards, and (ii) a prosocial effect that emerged late in sessions independent of reciprocity. These results support the cooperative breeding hypothesis, but suggest a minimal role for positive reciprocity, and emphasize the importance of investigating proximate temporal mechanisms underlying prosocial behaviour.     

Food Sharing in Lion Tamarins (<Emphasis Type="Italic">Leontopithecus chrysomelas</Emphasis>): Does Foraging Difficulty Affect Investment in Young by Breeders and Helpers?

Food sharing with immatures is an important and relatively well studied aspect of infant care in many cooperative species. A key point that has not yet been fully addressed, however, is how increasing the difficulty of obtaining food influences the willingness of breeders and helpers to provision immature offspring. We used captive golden headed lion tamarins (Leontopithecus chrysomelas) to examine how breeders and helpers differ in provisioning juvenile individuals according to the level of difficulty of obtaining food. The level of difficulty in obtaining food was varied by placing the food inside tubes that allowed access only by adults. When food acquisition became more difficult, food sharing with juveniles and breeding females increased significantly. Begging calls by breeding females and juveniles increased during the experimental condition, which probably led to increases in food sharing. Breeders and helpers did not differ in their contribution to provisioning when food was easily available, nor did they differ in their contribution when food was difficult to obtain. Breeding males in callitrichids have a prominent role in transferring food to offspring, but contrary to our expectations, they did not increase food transfer in the experimental condition. An unexpected result was the increased investment of the breeding female into her current offspring when the level of difficulty of obtaining food was higher. We suggest that breeding lion tamarin females are not as constrained by reproductive costs as breeding females of other callitrichids. Degree of reproductive skew is hypothesized as a factor affecting the contribution of breeders and helpers to offspring care in cooperative breeding mammals, though we suggest that more studies are needed to validate such a generalization.     

Food sharing and affiliation: An experimental and longitudinal study in cockatiels (Nymphicus hollandicus)

Food sharing has attracted much attention because of its apparently altruistic nature and its link to prosociality. However, food sharing has been mostly studied in a reproductive context, during courtship and parental care, where the fitness benefits are obvious. We still lack a clear understanding of the functions of food sharing outside any reproductive context and within social groups of same‐aged peers. Previous studies suggest that cofeeding, the action to let another animal feed from the same monopolizable food source, may be used to build and strengthen bonds between individuals. This may be particularly crucial in social birds forming long‐term associations between mates or siblings such as psittacids and corvids. Here, we investigated food sharing and affiliative behaviors such as allopreening in a psittacine species, namely in a group of captive juvenile cockatiels (Nymphicus hollandicus) consisting of five siblings and five unrelated birds. Our main objective was to study the developmental pattern of food sharing over time and its implication in social bonding depending on kinship, affiliation, and sex. Studying cockatiels in this context is providing many new information since most of the studies on food sharing in birds focused on corvids. We found that, contrary to jackdaws, cockatiels continued to share food with multiple individuals, although the frequency of cofeeding as well as the number of cofeeding partners decreased over time. Cockatiels shared more food with their siblings than with other conspecifics but they were not more likely to do cofeeding with birds of the opposite sex. We also found evidence that young cockatiels exchanged more food with those from whom they received food (reciprocity) and, to a lesser extent, allopreening (interchange), than from other cockatiels. Our findings suggest that in cockatiels, food sharing within social groups serves the formation (and maintenance) of affiliative bonds, especially between siblings, rather than pair bonds, but might additionally be explained by reciprocity, interchange, and harassment avoidance.     

Impartial Institutions,Pathogen Stress and the Expanding Social Network

Anthropologists have documented substantial cross-society variation in people’s willingness to treat strangers with impartial, universal norms versus favoring members of their local community. Researchers have proposed several adaptive accounts for these differences. One variant of the pathogen stress hypothesis predicts that people will be more likely to favor local in-group members when they are under greater infectious disease threat. The material security hypothesis instead proposes that institutions that permit people to meet their basic needs through impartial interactions with strangers reinforce a tendency toward impartiality, whereas people lacking such institutions must rely on local community members to meet their basic needs. Some studies have examined these hypotheses using self-reported preferences, but not with behavioral measures. We conducted behavioral experiments in eight diverse societies that measure individuals’ willingness to favor in-group members by ignoring an impartial rule. Consistent with the material security hypothesis, members of societies enjoying better-quality government services and food security show a stronger preference for following an impartial rule over investing in their local in-group. Our data show no support for the pathogen stress hypothesis as applied to favoring in-groups and instead suggest that favoring in-group members more closely reflects a general adaptive fit with social institutions that have arisen in each society.     

On the psychology of cooperation in humans and other primates: combining the natural history and experimental evidence of prosociality

In any given species, cooperation involves prosocial acts that usually return a fitness benefit to the actor. These acts are produced by a set of psychological rules, which will be similar in related species if they have a similar natural history of cooperation. Prosocial acts can be (i) reactive, i.e. in response to specific stimuli, or (ii) proactive, i.e. occur in the absence of such stimuli. We propose that reactive prosocial acts reflect sensitivity to (i) signals or signs of need and (ii) the presence and size of an audience, as modified by (iii) social distance to the partner or partners. We examine the evidence for these elements in humans and other animals, especially non-human primates, based on the natural history of cooperation, quantified in the context of food sharing, and various experimental paradigms. The comparison suggests that humans share with their closest living relatives reactive responses to signals of need, but differ in sensitivity to signs of need and cues of being watched, as well as in the presence of proactive prosociality. We discuss ultimate explanations for these derived features, in particular the adoption of cooperative breeding as well as concern for reputation and costly signalling during human evolution.     

Monogamy,strongly bonded groups,and the evolution of human social structure

Human social evolution has most often been treated in a piecemeal fashion, with studies focusing on the evolution of specific components of human society such as pair‐bonding, cooperative hunting, male provisioning, grandmothering, cooperative breeding, food sharing, male competition, male violence, sexual coercion, territoriality, and between‐group conflicts. Evolutionary models about any one of those components are usually concerned with two categories of questions, one relating to the origins of the component and the other to its impact on the evolution of human cognition and social life. Remarkably few studies have been concerned with the evolution of the entity that integrates all components, the human social system itself. That social system has as its core feature human social structure, which I define here as the common denominator of all human societies in terms of group composition, mating system, residence patterns, and kinship structures. The paucity of information on the evolution of human social structure poses substantial problems because that information is useful, if not essential, to assess both the origins and impact of any particular aspect of human society.     

Social organization, reproduction and rearing strategies of Callimico goeldii: new clues from the wild

The callitrichines are a specialized radiation of primates that are characterized in part by variable social systems and cooperative infant care. Callimico goeldii, unlike the other callitrichines, have single rather than twin offspring, reducing the need for allocare and permitting synchronous breeding within groups. Low mortality rates among offspring and unstable social groups are suggested to be possible factors that have led to single births among C. goeldii. Single offspring may benefit from greater maternal investment and more frequent food sharing than twin offspring, factors that may help to explain why C. goeldii reaches sexual maturity more rapidly than other callitrichines. In addition, increased breeding opportunities for young C. goeldii females may have selected for rapid maturation rates among this species. Postpartum ovulation and aseasonal resource availability appear to permit females to have biannual birth seasons, further increasing the potential reproductive output.     

How institutions shaped the last major evolutionary transition to large-scale human societies

What drove the transition from small-scale human societies centred on kinship and personal exchange, to large-scale societies comprising cooperation and division of labour among untold numbers of unrelated individuals? We propose that the unique human capacity to negotiate institutional rules that coordinate social actions was a key driver of this transition. By creating institutions, humans have been able to move from the default ‘Hobbesian’ rules of the ‘game of life’, determined by physical/environmental constraints, into self-created rules of social organization where cooperation can be individually advantageous even in large groups of unrelated individuals. Examples include rules of food sharing in hunter–gatherers, rules for the usage of irrigation systems in agriculturalists, property rights and systems for sharing reputation between mediaeval traders. Successful institutions create rules of interaction that are self-enforcing, providing direct benefits both to individuals that follow them, and to individuals that sanction rule breakers. Forming institutions requires shared intentionality, language and other cognitive abilities largely absent in other primates. We explain how cooperative breeding likely selected for these abilities early in the Homo lineage. This allowed anatomically modern humans to create institutions that transformed the self-reliance of our primate ancestors into the division of labour of large-scale human social organization.     

Harsh nutritional environment has positive and negative consequences for family living in a burying beetle

Harsh environmental conditions in form of low food availability for both offspring and parents alike can affect breeding behavior and success. There has been evidence that food scarce environments can induce competition between family members, and this might be intensified when parents are caring as a pair and not alone. On the other hand, it is possible that a harsh, food-poor environment could also promote cooperative behaviors within a family, leading, for example, to a higher breeding success of pairs than of single parents. We studied the influence of a harsh nutritional environment on the fitness outcome of family living in the burying beetle Nicrophorus vespilloides. These beetles use vertebrate carcasses for reproduction. We manipulated food availability on two levels: before and during breeding. We then compared the effect of these manipulations in broods with either single females or biparentally breeding males and females. We show that pairs of beetles that experienced a food-poor environment before breeding consumed a higher quantity of the carcass than well-fed pairs or single females. Nevertheless, they were more successful in raising a brood with higher larval survival compared to pairs that did not experience a food shortage before breeding. We also show that food availability during breeding and social condition had independent effects on the mass of the broods raised, with lighter broods in biparental families than in uniparental ones and on smaller carcasses. Our study thus indicates that a harsh nutritional environment can increase both cooperative as well as competitive interactions between family members. Moreover, our results suggest that it can either hamper or drive the formation of a family because parents choose to restrain reproductive investment in a current brood or are encouraged to breed in a food-poor environment, depending on former experiences and their own nutritional status.     

Seasonal Variation in Response to Neighbors and Strangers by a Territorial Songbird

Reduced aggression toward territorial neighbors, termed the ‘dear‐enemy’ effect, is thought to arise because territorial animals benefit by avoiding contests with neighbors with whom they have already established relationships. The dear‐enemy effect has been described in many taxa, but few studies have considered whether or not neighbors’ relationships are affected by changes in the social environment. In this study, I tested whether Carolina wrens, Thryothorus ludovicianus, behaviorally discriminate between neighbors and strangers in two different social environments: in spring when territories have been established for several months, and in fall when an influx of new birds claiming territories might de‐stabilize wren neighborhoods. Comparisons of responses of territorial males to playbacks of songs from neighbors and strangers showed that Carolina wrens show the dear‐enemy effect in spring, but not in fall in this design. The apparent lack of a differential response to neighbors and strangers in fall might be due to a reduction in aggression toward strangers. This study provides evidence that seasonal changes in the dear‐enemy effect coincide with seasonal changes in the social environment.     

Smiles when sharing

One of the proposed functions of human smiling is to advertise cooperative dispositions and thereby increase the likelihood that a social partner would invest resources in a relationship. In particular, smiles involving an emotional component would be honest signals of altruistic dispositions because they are not easy to produce voluntarily. In this study, 60 people were covertly filmed while interacting with a friend in two conditions: control and sharing. Smiles were classified into Duchenne (spontaneous) and non-Duchenne smiles. Participants also completed a series of questionnaires, including the Altruism Scale and a self-report questionnaire of emotional state. Interestingly, Duchenne smiles were displayed at higher rates in the sharing situation as opposed to the control situation, whereas non-Duchenne smiles were unaffected by the type of interaction. Furthermore, Duchenne smiles in the sharing interaction were positively affected by a measure of altruism. Self-reported emotional states did not vary between conditions and were poorly related to smiling. This study shows that the Duchenne smile is relevant to situations that involve the sharing of material resources because it would reliably advertise altruistic intentions. The Duchenne smile could therefore be an important signal in the formation and maintenance of cooperative relationships.     

Beyond aggression: Androgen-receptor blockade modulates social interaction in wild meerkats

In male vertebrates, androgens are inextricably linked to reproduction, social dominance, and aggression, often at the cost of paternal investment or prosociality. Testosterone is invoked to explain rank-related reproductive differences, but its role within a status class, particularly among subordinates, is underappreciated. Recent evidence, especially for monogamous and cooperatively breeding species, suggests broader androgenic mediation of adult social interaction. We explored the actions of androgens in subordinate, male members of a cooperatively breeding species, the meerkat (Suricata suricatta). Although male meerkats show no rank-related testosterone differences, subordinate helpers rarely reproduce. We blocked androgen receptors, in the field, by treating subordinate males with the antiandrogen, flutamide. We monitored androgen concentrations (via baseline serum and time-sequential fecal sampling) and recorded behavior within their groups (via focal observation). Relative to controls, flutamide-treated animals initiated less and received more high-intensity aggression (biting, threatening, feeding competition), engaged in more prosocial behavior (social sniffing, grooming, huddling), and less frequently initiated play or assumed a ‘dominant’ role during play, revealing significant androgenic effects across a broad range of social behavior. By contrast, guarding or vigilance and measures of olfactory and vocal communication in subordinate males appeared unaffected by flutamide treatment. Thus, androgens in male meerkat helpers are aligned with the traditional trade-off between promoting reproductive and aggressive behavior at a cost to affiliation. Our findings, based on rare endocrine manipulation in wild mammals, show a more pervasive role for androgens in adult social behavior than is often recognized, with possible relevance for understanding tradeoffs in cooperative systems.     

Functional analysis of social staring behavior in an all-male group of mountain gorillas

A total 202 social staring episodes (prolonged gazing by one individual toward another within a short distance) were observed in various social contexts among six unrelated, adult, and subadult male mountain gorillas. Staring was not accompanied by distinct facial expressions by actors or recipients, irrespective of their age or dominance rank. Younger, subordinate animals tended to stare at elder, dominant animals more frequently than vice versa. Staring may have multiple functions depending on the social context. In the initiation of non-agonistic interactions, staring rarely occurred, but was very successful for younger males in eliciting play or homosexual interactions from older animals. Staring was also directed by younger males to older males for greeting or appeasement. It may possibly play a role in reducing the increased social tension that occurs during or after conflict and in averting the potential conflict among older males. Younger males occasionally supplanted older males by staring at feeding spots. This slow supplantation is similar to the phenomenon of food sharing achieved through begging behavior in chimpanzees and bonobos. A prolonged gaze including staring by subordinates towards dominants may characterize the frequent and prolonged face-to-face interactions in the African great apes, and contrasts with a frequent gaze aversion by subordinates towards dominants in macaques or baboons. A difference between gorillas and other apes is that, chimpanzees and bonobos make positive contact with each other through eye contact, while gorillas simply stare at another without physical contact in greeting or appeasement process. Staring may serve an effective strategy for younger male gorillas to intervene safely in olders' conflict and sometimes to suppress or inhibit olders' performance, but their non-agonistic contacts or supporting attacks may not contribute to the establishment or support of social bonds between them. It is possible that staring may be common among the African great apes and man, and that it has evolved as a tactics to mask the dominant/subordinate relationships between individuals with multiple functions.     

Social tolerance in a despotic primate: co-feeding between consortship partners in rhesus macaques

Food sharing among nonkin-one of the most fascinating cooperative behaviors in humans-is not widespread in nonhuman primates. Over the past few years, a large body of work has investigated the contexts in which primates cooperate and share food with unrelated individuals. This work has successfully demonstrated that species-specific differences in temperament constrain the extent to which food sharing emerges in experimental situations, with despotic species being less likely to share food than tolerant ones. However, little experimental work has examined the contexts that promote food sharing and cooperation within a species. Here, we examine whether one salient reproductive context-the consortship dyad-can allow the necessary social tolerance for co-feeding to emerge in an extremely despotic species, the rhesus macaque (Macaca mulatta). We gave naturally formed male-female rhesus macaque pairs access to a monopolizable food site in the free-ranging population at Cayo Santiago, Puerto Rico. Using this method, we were able to show that tolerated co-feeding between unrelated adults can take place in this despotic species. Specifically, our results show that consort pairs co-fed at the experimental food site more than nonconsort control pairs, leading females to obtain more food in this context. These results suggest that co-feeding is possible even in the most despotic of primate species, but perhaps only in contexts that specifically promote the necessary social tolerance. Researchers might profit from exploring whether other kinds of within-species contexts could also generate cooperative behaviors.