Conflicts of interest and the evolution of decision sharing

Social animals regularly face consensus decisions whereby they choose, collectively, between mutually exclusive actions. Such decisions often involve conflicts of interest between group members with respect to preferred action. Conflicts could, in principle, be resolved, either by sharing decisions between members (‘shared decisions’) or by one ‘dominant’ member making decisions on behalf of the whole group (‘unshared decisions’). Both, shared and unshared decisions, have been observed. However, it is unclear as to what favours the evolution of either decision type. Here, after a brief literature review, we present a novel method, involving a combination of self-organizing system and game theory modelling, of investigating the evolution of shared and unshared decisions. We apply the method to decisions on movement direction. We find that both, shared and unshared, decisions can evolve without individuals having a global overview of the group''s behaviour or any knowledge about other members'' preferences or intentions. Selection favours unshared over shared decisions when conflicts are high relative to grouping benefits, and vice versa. These results differ from those of group decision models relating to activity timings. We attribute this to fundamental differences between collective decisions about modalities that are disjunct (here, space) or continuous (here, time) with respect to costs/benefits.     

Deciding group movements: Where and when to go

A group of animals can only move cohesively, if group members “somehow” reach a consensus about the timing (e.g., start) and the spatial direction/destination of the collective movement. Timing and spatial decisions usually differ with respect to the continuity of their cost/benefit distribution in such a way that, in principle, compromises are much more feasible in timing decision (e.g., median preferred time) than they are in spatial decisions. The consequence is that consensus costs connected to collective timing decisions are usually less skewed amongst group members than are consensus costs connected to spatial decisions. This, in turn, influences the evolution of decision sharing: sharing in timing decisions is most likely to evolve when conflicts are high relative to group cohesion benefits, while sharing in spatial decisions is most likely to evolve in the opposite situation. We discuss the implications of these differences for the study of collective movement decisions.     

Shared or unshared consensus decision in macaques?

Members of a social group have to make collective decisions in order to synchronise their activities. In a shared consensus decision, all group members can take part in the decision whereas in an unshared consensus decision, one individual, usually a dominant member of the group, takes the decision for the rest of the group. It has been suggested that the type of decision-making of a species could be influenced by its social style. To investigate this further, we studied collective movements in two species with opposed social systems, the Tonkean macaque (Macaca tonkeana) and the rhesus macaque (Macaca mulatta). From our results, it appears that the decision to move is the result of the choices and actions of several individuals in both groups. However, this consensus decision involved nearly all group members in Tonkean macaques whereas dominant and old individuals took a prominent role in rhesus macaques. Thus, we suggest that Tonkean macaques display equally shared consensus decisions to move, whereas in the same context rhesus macaque exhibit partially shared consensus decisions. Such a difference in making a collective decision might be linked to the different social systems of the two studied species.     

Consensus decision making in animals

Individual animals routinely face decisions that are crucial to their fitness. In social species, however, many of these decisions need to be made jointly with other group members because the group will split apart unless a consensus is reached. Here, we review empirical and theoretical studies of consensus decision making, and place them in a coherent framework. In particular, we classify consensus decisions according to the degree to which they involve conflict of interest between group members, and whether they involve either local or global communication; we ask, for different categories of consensus decision, who makes the decision, what are the underlying mechanisms, and what are the functional consequences. We conclude that consensus decision making is common in non-human animals, and that cooperation between group members in the decision-making process is likely to be the norm, even when the decision involves significant conflict of interest.     

When to use social information: the advantage of large group size in individual decision making

Correct decision making is crucial for animals to maximize foraging success and minimize predation risk. Group-living animals can make such decisions by using their own personal information or by pooling information with other group members (i.e. social information). Here, we investigate how individuals might best balance their use of personal and social information. We use a simple modelling approach in which individual decisions based upon social information are more likely to be correct when more individuals are involved and their personal information is more accurate. Our model predicts that when the personal information of group members is poor (accurate less than half the time), individuals should avoid pooling information. In contrast, when personal information is reliable (accurate at least half the time), individuals should use personal information less often and social information more often, and this effect should grow stronger in larger groups. One implication of this pattern is that social information allows less well-informed members of large groups to reach a correct decision with the same probability as more well-informed members of small groups. Thus, animals in larger groups may be able to minimize the costs of collecting personal information without impairing their ability to make correct decisions.     

The empirical question of thresholds and mechanisms of mate choice

Summary Theoretical discussions concerning how animals might best sample and select mates have suggested that individuals could base decisions either on a sample of mates (sampled-based decisions) or on a threshold of comparison (threshold-based decisions). Recent theoretical work demonstrates that threshold-based mating decisions generate higher expected fitness than sample-based mating decisions when search costs exist. Empirical results from most unmanipulated systems, however, either conclude that females make sample-based decisions or are inconclusive. A few experimental studies designed to detect mating thresholds purport to demonstrate threshold-based choice but an examination of these studies indicates such conclusions were premature. We believe that few examples of threshold-based choice exist because protocols designed to identify mating thresholds were often inconsistent with models of threshold choice. We suggest that future empirical work strive not to document mating thresholdsper se. Rather, future work might best reveal decision rules by manipulating the distribution of quality among potential mates; such manipulations predict uniquely how females using sample-based and threshold-based decision rules should behave.     

Multilevel selection and the social transmission of behavior

Many evolutionary models assume that behaviors are caused directly by genes. An implication is that behavioral uniformity should be found only in groups that are genetically uniform. Yet, the members of human social groups often behave in a uniform fashion, despite the fact that they are genetically diverse. Behavioral uniformity can occur through a variety of psychological mechanisms and social processes, such as imitation, consensus decision making, or the imposition of social norms. We present a series of models in which genes code for social transmission rules, which in turn govern the behaviors that are adopted. Transmission rules can evolve in randomly formed groups that concentrate phenotypic variation at the between-group level, favoring the evolution of altruistic behaviors and other group-advantageous traits. In addition, a direct bias toward adopting altruistic behaviors can evolve. Our models begin to show how group selection can be a strong force in human evolution, despite the absence of extreme genetic variation among groups.     

Where Next? Group Coordination and Collective Decision Making by Primates

Primate groups need to remain coordinated in their activities and collectively decide when and where to travel if they are to accrue the benefits and minimize the costs of sociality. The achievement of coordinated activity and group decision making therefore has important implications for individual survival and reproduction. The aim of this special issue is to bring together a collection of empirical, theoretical, and commentary articles by primatologists studying this rapidly expanding topic. In this article, we introduce the contributions within the special issue and provide a background to the topic. We begin by focusing on decisions that involve a collective transition between a resting and a moving state, a transition we term making the move. We examine whether specific predeparture behaviors seen during transitions represent intentional processes or more simple response facilitation. Next we classify decisions according to the contribution of individual group members, and describe how, and why, certain individuals can have a disproportionate influence over group-mates?? behavior. We then review how primate groups make decisions on the move. In particular, we focus on how variability in group size and spatial organization helps or hinders information transmission and coordination. We end with a discussion of new tools and methodology that will allow future investigators to address some outstanding questions in primate coordination and decision-making research. We conclude that a better integration of concepts and terminology, along with a focus on how individuals integrate environmental and social information, will be critical to developing a satisfactory understanding of collective patterns of behavior in primate systems.     

Quorum responses and consensus decision making

Animal groups are said to make consensus decisions when group members come to agree on the same option. Consensus decisions are taxonomically widespread and potentially offer three key benefits: maintenance of group cohesion, enhancement of decision accuracy compared with lone individuals and improvement in decision speed. In the absence of centralized control, arriving at a consensus depends on local interactions in which each individual''s likelihood of choosing an option increases with the number of others already committed to that option. The resulting positive feedback can effectively direct most or all group members to the best available choice. In this paper, we examine the functional form of the individual response to others'' behaviour that lies at the heart of this process. We review recent theoretical and empirical work on consensus decisions, and we develop a simple mathematical model to show the central importance to speedy and accurate decisions of quorum responses, in which an animal''s probability of exhibiting a behaviour is a sharply nonlinear function of the number of other individuals already performing this behaviour. We argue that systems relying on such quorum rules can achieve cohesive choice of the best option while also permitting adaptive tuning of the trade-off between decision speed and accuracy.     

Self-Improvement for Team-Players: The Effects of Individual Effort on Aggregated Group Information

By putting effort into behaviours like foraging or scanning for predators, an animal can improve the correctness of its personal information about the environment. For animals living in groups, the individual can gain further information if it is able to assess public information about the environment from other group members. Earlier work has shown that consensus group decisions based upon the public information available within the group are more likely to be correct than decisions based upon personal information alone, given that each individual in a group has a fixed probability of being correct. This study develops a model where group members are able to improve their personal likelihood of making a correct decision by conducting some level of (costly) effort. I demonstrate that there is an evolutionarily stable level of effort for all the individuals within the group, and the effort made by an individual should decrease with increasing group size. The relevance of these results to social decision making is discussed: in particular, these results are similar to standard theoretical predictions about the amount of vigilance shown by individuals decreasing with increasing group size. However, this model suggests that these results could come about where individuals are coordinating their effort within the group (unlike standard models, which assume that all individual effort is independent of the actions of others). This ties in with experimental findings where individuals have been shown to monitor the efforts of others.     

Medical decision making and medical education: challenges and opportunities

The Flexner Report highlighted the importance of teaching medical students to reason about uncertainty. The science of medical decision making seeks to explain how medical judgments and decisions ought ideally to be made, how they are actually made in practice, and how they can be improved, given the constraints of medical practice. The field considers both clinical decisions by or for individual patients and societal decisions designed to benefit the public. Despite the relevance of decision making to medical practice, it currently receives little formal attention in the U.S. medical school curriculum. This article suggests three roles for medical decision making in medical education. First, basic decision science would be a valuable prerequisite to medical training. Second, several decision-related competencies would be important outcomes of medical education; these include the physician's own decision skills, the ability to guide patients in shared decisions, and knowledge of health policy decisions at the societal level. Finally, decision making could serve as a unifying principle in the design of the medical curriculum, integrating other curricular content around the need to create physicians who are competent and caring decision makers.     

Group decision making in fission-fusion societies: evidence from two-field experiments in Bechstein's bats

Group decisions are required when group coordination is beneficial, but individuals can choose between alternatives. Despite the increased interest in animal group decision making, there is a lack of experimental field studies that investigate how animals with conflicting information make group decisions. In particular, no field studies have considered the influence of fission-fusion behaviour (temporary splitting into subgroups) on group decisions. We studied group decision making in two wild Bechstein's bat colonies, which are fission-fusion societies of stable individual composition. Since they frequently switch communal roosts, colony members must regularly make group decisions over where to roost. In the two-field experiments, we provided marked individuals with conflicting information about the suitability of potential roosts. We investigated whether conflicting information led to group decisions that followed a 'unanimous' or a 'majority' rule, or increased colony fission. Individual behaviour suggests that bats considered both their own information and the behaviour of others when deciding where to roost. Group decisions about communal roosts reflected the information available to a majority of the bats roosting together, but conflicting information led to an increased fission in one colony. Our results suggest that fission-fusion societies allow individuals to avoid majority decisions that are not in their favour.     

Collective decision‐making and fission–fusion dynamics: a conceptual framework

Sociality exists in an extraordinary range of ecological settings. For individuals to accrue the benefits associated with social interactions, they are required to maintain a degree of spatial and temporal coordination in their activities, and make collective decisions. Such coordination and decision‐making has been the focus of much recent research. However, efforts largely have been directed toward understanding patterns of collective behaviour in relatively stable and cohesive groups. Less well understood is how fission–fusion dynamics mediate the process and outcome of collective decisions making. Here, we aim to apply established concepts and knowledge to highlight the implications of fission–fusion dynamics for collective decisions, presenting a conceptual framework based on the outcome of a small‐group discussion INCORE meeting (funded by the European Community's Sixth Framework Programme). First, we discuss how the degree of uncertainty in the environment shapes social flexibility and therefore the types of decisions individuals make in different social settings. Second, we propose that the quality of social relationships and the energetic needs of each individual influence fission decisions. Third, we explore how these factors affect the probability of individuals to fuse. Fourth, we discuss how group size and fission–fusion dynamics may affect communication processes between individuals at a local or global scale to reach a consensus or to fission. Finally, we offer a number of suggestions for future research, capturing emerging ideas and concepts on the interaction between collective decisions and fission–fusion dynamics.     

群居动物中的共同决策

群居的个体能够更好的躲避天敌的捕食,增强与同种其它种群的资源竞争,增加生殖机会与生殖成功率,使信息在个体之间顺畅的交流等。但是群内个体又会在有限的资源下产生群内的个体竞争,从而引起动物群的分裂,失去群居的利益。为了保持动物群的聚合力,当动物群内出现冲突时,需要在群内个体间形成协调各种冲突以及在群内达成共识的机制。依据动物社群组成的不同,领导力机制和自组织机制是协调群内冲突,形成一致决策和联合决策的两种主要机制。从行为生态学的角度入手,阐述了动物群内共同决策的类型,群内冲突的协调机制,共同决策的制定过程,比较了信息因素与利益因素在共同决策制定过程中的影响。旨在藉此推进我国相关领域研究的开展, 为群居动物社会与行为生态学研究者启发思路,并为保护群居濒危物种提供科学依据。     

The wisdom of stalemates: consensus and clustering as filtering mechanisms for improving collective accuracy

Groups of organisms, from bacteria to fish schools to human societies, depend on their ability to make accurate decisions in an uncertain world. Most models of collective decision-making assume that groups reach a consensus during a decision-making bout, often through simple majority rule. In many natural and sociological systems, however, groups may fail to reach consensus, resulting in stalemates. Here, we build on opinion dynamics and collective wisdom models to examine how stalemates may affect the wisdom of crowds. For simple environments, where individuals have access to independent sources of information, we find that stalemates improve collective accuracy by selectively filtering out incorrect decisions (an effect we call stalemate filtering). In complex environments, where individuals have access to both shared and independent information, this effect is even more pronounced, restoring the wisdom of crowds in regions of parameter space where large groups perform poorly when making decisions using majority rule. We identify network properties that tune the system between consensus and accuracy, providing mechanisms by which animals, or evolution, could dynamically adjust the collective decision-making process in response to the reward structure of the possible outcomes. Overall, these results highlight the adaptive potential of stalemate filtering for improving the decision-making abilities of group-living animals.     

Motor Cost Influences Perceptual Decisions

Perceptual decision making has been widely studied using tasks in which subjects are asked to discriminate a visual stimulus and instructed to report their decision with a movement. In these studies, performance is measured by assessing the accuracy of the participants’ choices as a function of the ambiguity of the visual stimulus. Typically, the reporting movement is considered as a mere means of reporting the decision with no influence on the decision-making process. However, recent studies have shown that even subtle differences of biomechanical costs between movements may influence how we select between them. Here we investigated whether this purely motor cost could also influence decisions in a perceptual discrimination task in detriment of accuracy. In other words, are perceptual decisions only dependent on the visual stimulus and entirely orthogonal to motor costs? Here we show the results of a psychophysical experiment in which human subjects were presented with a random dot motion discrimination task and asked to report the perceived motion direction using movements of different biomechanical cost. We found that the pattern of decisions exhibited a significant bias towards the movement of lower cost, even when this bias reduced performance accuracy. This strongly suggests that motor costs influence decision making in visual discrimination tasks for which its contribution is neither instructed nor beneficial.     

The Organization of Collective Group Movements in Wild Barbary Macaques (Macaca sylvanus): Social Structure Drives Processes of Group Coordination in Macaques

Social animals have to coordinate activities and collective movements to benefit from the advantages of group living. Animals in large groups maintain cohesion by self-organization processes whereas in smaller groups consensus decisions can be reached. Where consensus decisions are relevant leadership may emerge. Variation in the organization of collective movements has been linked to variation in female social tolerance among macaque species ranging from despotic to egalitarian. Here we investigated the processes underlying group movements in a wild macaque species characterized by a degree of social tolerance intermediate to previously studied congeneric species. We focused on processes before, during and after the departure of the first individual. To this end, we observed one group of wild Barbary macaques (Macaca sylvanus) in the Middle Atlas, Morocco using all-occurrence behaviour sampling of 199 collective movements. We found that initiators of a collective movement usually chose the direction in which more individuals displayed pre-departure behavior. Dominant individuals contributed to group movements more than subordinates, especially juveniles, measured as frequencies of successful initiations and pre-departure behaviour. Joining was determined by affiliative relationships and the number of individuals that already joined the movement (mimetism). Thus, in our study group partially shared consensus decisions mediated by selective mimetism seemed to be prevalent, overall supporting the suggestion that a species’ social style affects the organization of group movements. As only the most tolerant species show equally shared consensus decisions whereas in others the decision is partially shared with a bias to dominant individuals the type of consensus decisions seems to follow a stepwise relation. Joining order may also follow a stepwise, however opposite, relationship, because dominance only determined joining in highly despotic, but not in intermediate and tolerant species.     

Process evaluation of appreciative inquiry to translate pain management evidence into pediatric nursing practice

Background

Current healthcare systems have extended the evidence-based medicine (EBM) approach to health policy and delivery decisions, such as access-to-care, healthcare funding and health program continuance, through attempts to integrate valid and reliable evidence into the decision making process. These policy decisions have major impacts on society and have high personal and financial costs associated with those decisions. Decision models such as these function under a shared assumption of rational choice and utility maximization in the decision-making process.

Discussion

We contend that health policy decision makers are generally unable to attain the basic goals of evidence-based decision making (EBDM) and evidence-based policy making (EBPM) because humans make decisions with their naturally limited, faulty, and biased decision-making processes. A cognitive information processing framework is presented to support this argument, and subtle cognitive processing mechanisms are introduced to support the focal thesis: health policy makers' decisions are influenced by the subjective manner in which they individually process decision-relevant information rather than on the objective merits of the evidence alone. As such, subsequent health policy decisions do not necessarily achieve the goals of evidence-based policy making, such as maximizing health outcomes for society based on valid and reliable research evidence.

Summary

In this era of increasing adoption of evidence-based healthcare models, the rational choice, utility maximizing assumptions in EBDM and EBPM, must be critically evaluated to ensure effective and high-quality health policy decisions. The cognitive information processing framework presented here will aid health policy decision makers by identifying how their decisions might be subtly influenced by non-rational factors. In this paper, we identify some of the biases and potential intervention points and provide some initial suggestions about how the EBDM/EBPM process can be improved.     

Science,Uncertainty, and Values in Ecological Restoration: A Case Study in Structured Decision‐Making and Adaptive Management

This article demonstrates a structured and collaborative approach to decision‐making in the context of adaptive management experiments, using a case study involving the restoration of a hydrological regime in a regulated river in western Canada. It provides a framework based on principles of decision analysis for structuring difficult multi‐attribute decisions and building the trust and technical capacity needed to implement them. Participants included ecologists and fisheries biologists, government regulators, electric utility employees, and representatives of aboriginal communities. The case study demonstrates a values‐based approach to implementing adaptive management that addresses some of the long‐standing difficulties associated with integrating adaptive management into restoration decisions. It highlights practical methods for incorporating participants' values concerned with learning, cultural quality, and stewardship as part of developing a decision‐making and monitoring framework for restoration initiatives. It also provides an example of how to implement principles of meaningful consultation in a restoration context, with emphasis on ensuring that all voices and concerns are heard and meaningfully incorporated. Participants have adopted the framework as a model to guide future collaborative decision‐making processes involving Aboriginal communities, regulatory agencies, and other parties.     

Exploring foraging decisions in a social primate using discrete-choice models

Abstract There is a growing appreciation of the multiple social and nonsocial factors influencing the foraging behavior of social animals but little understanding of how these factors depend on habitat characteristics or individual traits. This partly reflects the difficulties inherent in using conventional statistical techniques to analyze multifactor, multicontext foraging decisions. Discrete-choice models provide a way to do so, and we demonstrate this by using them to investigate patch preference in a wild population of social foragers (chacma baboons Papio ursinus). Data were collected from 29 adults across two social groups, encompassing 683 foraging decisions over a 6-month period and the results interpreted using an information-theoretic approach. Baboon foraging decisions were influenced by multiple nonsocial and social factors and were often contingent on the characteristics of the habitat or individual. Differences in decision making between habitats were consistent with changes in interference-competition costs but not with changes in social-foraging benefits. Individual differences in decision making were suggestive of a trade-off between dominance rank and social capital. Our findings emphasize that taking a multifactor, multicontext approach is important to fully understand animal decision making. We also demonstrate how discrete-choice models can be used to achieve this.