Advertisement

Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

, Volume 67, Issue 1, pp 163–173 | Cite as

Network position: a key component in the characterization of social personality types

  • Alexander D. M. Wilson
  • Stefan Krause
  • Niels J. Dingemanse
  • Jens Krause
Methods

Abstract

In recent years, animal social interactions have received much attention in terms of personality research (e.g. aggressive or cooperative interactions). However, other components of social behaviour such as those describing the intensity, frequency, directedness and individual repeatability of interactions in animal groups have largely been neglected. Network analysis offers a valuable opportunity to characterize individual consistency of traits in labile social groups and therein provide novel insights to personality research in ways previously not possible using traditional techniques. Should individual network positions be consistently different between individuals under changing conditions, they might reflect expressions of an individual's personality. Here, we discuss a conceptual framework for using network analyses to infer the presence of individual differences and present a statistical test based on randomization techniques for testing the consistency of network positions in individuals. The statistical tools presented are useful because if particular individuals consistently occupy key positions in social networks, then this is also likely to have consequences for their fitness as well as for that of others in the population. These consequences may be particularly significant since individual network position has been shown to be important for the transmission of diseases, socially learnt information and genetic material between individuals and populations.

Keywords

Social network analysis Behavioural types Temperament 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Max Wolf and Dick James for helpful discussions and suggestions for the manuscript. ADMW was supported by a postdoctoral research fellowship from the Alexander von Humboldt foundation. NJD was supported by the Max Planck Society. We would also like to thank Darren Croft and two anonymous reviewers for comments and suggestions.

References

  1. Bell AM, Hankison SJ, Laskowski KL (2009) The repeatability of behaviour: a meta-analysis. Anim Behav 77:771–783CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Budaev SV (2010) Using principal components and factor analysis in animal behaviour research: caveats and guidelines. Ethology 116:472–480CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cote J, Dreiss A, Clobert J (2008) Social personality trait and fitness. Proc R Soc Lond B 275:2851–2858CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Croft DP, James R, Krause J (2008) Exploring animal social networks. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  5. Croft DP, Krause J, Darden SK, Ramnarine IW, Faria JJ, James R (2009) Behavioural trait assortment in a social network: patterns and implications. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 63:1495–1503CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Croft DP, Madden JR, Franks DW, James R (2011) Hypothesis testing in animal social networks. Trends Ecol Evol 26:502–507PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Darden SK, James R, Ramnarine IW, Croft DP (2009) Social implications of the battle of the sexes: sexual harassment disrupts female sociality and social recognition. Proc R Soc Lond B 276:2651–2656CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dingemanse NJ, Wolf M (2010) Recent models for adaptive personality differences: a review. Philos T R Soc B 365:3947–3958CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dingemanse NJ, Dochtermann N, Wright J (2010a) A method for exploring the structure of behavioural syndromes to allow formal comparison within and between data sets. Anim Behav 79:439–450CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dingemanse NJ, Kazem AJN, Réale D, Wright J (2010b) Behavioural reaction norms: animal personality meets individual plasticity. Trends Ecol Evol 25:81–89PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dingemanse NJ, Dochtermann N, Nakagawa S (2012) Defining behavioural syndromes and the role of “syndrome deviation” in understanding. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. doi: 10.1007/s00265-012-1416-2
  12. Dingemanse NJ, Dochtermann NA (2012) Quantifying individual variation in behaviour: mixed-effect modelling approaches. J Anim Ecol. doi: 10.1111/1365-2656.12013
  13. Dochtermann NA, Jenkins SH (2007) Behavioural syndromes in Merriam's kangaroo rats (Dipodomys merriami): a test of competing hypotheses. Proc R Soc Lond B 274:2343–2349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dochtermann NA, Jenkins SH (2011) Multivariate methods and small sample sizes. Ethology 117:95–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Drewe JA (2010) Who infects whom? Social networks and tuberculosis transmission in wild meerkats. Proc R Soc Lond B 277:633–642CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ellison NB, Steinfield C, Lampe C (2007) The benefits of Facebook “friends:” social capital and college students' use of online social network sites. J Comput-Mediat Comm 12:1143–1168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Flack JC, Girvan M, de Waal FBM, Krakauer DC (2006) Policing stabilizes construction of social niches in primates. Nature 439:426–429PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fowler JH, Dawes CT, Christakis NA (2009) Model of genetic variation in human social networks. P Natl Acad Sci USA 106:1720–1724CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Franz M, Nunn CL (2009) Network-based diffusion analysis: a new method for detecting social learning. Proc R Soc Lond B 276:1829–1836CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Frere CH, Kruetzen M, Mann J, Connor RC, Bejder L, Sherwin WB (2010) Social and genetic interactions drive fitness variation in a free-living dolphin population. P Natl Acad Sci USA 107:19949–19954CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hadfield JD, Wilson AJ, Garant D, Sheldon BC, Kruuk LEB (2010) The misuse of BLUP in ecology and evolution. Am Nat 175:116–125PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hamede RK, Bashford J, McCallum H, Jones M (2009) Contact networks in a wild Tasmanian devil (Sarcophilus harrisii) population: using social network analysis to reveal seasonal variability in social behaviour and its implications for transmission of devil facial tumour disease. Ecol Lett 12:1147–1157PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Horne TJ, Ylonen H (1998) Heritabilities of dominance-related traits in male bank voles (Clethrionomys glareolus). Evolution 52:894–899CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jacoby DMP, Busawon DS, Sims DW (2010) Sex and social networking: the influence of male presence on social structure of female shark groups. Behav Ecol 21:808–818CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Krause J, Ruxton GD (2002) Living in groups. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  26. Krause J, Croft DP, James R (2007) Social network theory in the behavioural sciences: potential applications. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 62:15–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Krause J, James R, Croft DP (2010) Personality in the context of social networks. Philos T R Soc B 365:4099–4106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Krause J, Wilson ADM, Croft DP (2011) New technology facilitates the study of social networks. Trends Ecol Evol 26:5–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lea AJ, Blumstein DT, Wey TW, Martin JGA (2010) Heritable victimization and the benefits of agonistic relationships. P Natl Acad Sci USA 107:21587–21592CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lusseau D, Newman MEJ (2004) Identifying the role that animals play in their social networks. Proc R Soc Lond B 271:S477–S481CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Madadhain J, Fisher D, Smyth P, White S, Boey YB (2005) Analysis and visualization of network data using JUNG. J Stat Softw 10:1–35Google Scholar
  32. Manly BFJ (2007) Randomization, bootstrap, and Monte Carlo methods in biology, 3rd edn. Chapman and Hall, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  33. McDonald DB (2007) Predicting fate from early connectivity in a social network. P Natl Acad Sci USA 104:10910–10914CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. McGhee KE, Travis J (2010) Repeatable behavioural type and stable dominance rank in the bluefin killifish. Anim Behav 79:497–507CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Moore AJ (1990) The inheritance of social dominance, mating behaviour and attractiveness to mates in male Nauphoeta cinerea. Anim Behav 39:388–397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Newman MEJ (2003) The structure and function of complex networks. Siam Rev 45:167–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Oh KP, Badyaev AV (2010) Structure of social networks in a passerine bird: consequences for sexual selection and the evolution of mating strategies. Am Nat 176:E80–E89PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Otterstatter MC, Thomson JD (2007) Contact networks and transmission of an intestinal pathogen in bumble bee (Bombus impatiens) colonies. Oecologia 154:411–421PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Pike TW, Samanta M, Lindstrom J, Royle NJ (2008) Behavioural phenotype affects social interactions in an animal network. Proc R Soc Lond B 275:2515–2520CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Réale D, Reader SM, Sol D, McDougall PT, Dingemanse NJ (2007) Integrating animal temperament within ecology and evolution. Biol Rev 82:291–318PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Ryder TB, McDonald DB, Blake JG, Parker PG, Loiselle BA (2008) Social networks in the lek-mating wire-tailed manakin (Pipra filicauda). Proc R Soc Lond B 275:1367–1374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Shizuka D, McDonald DB (2012) A social network perspective on measurements of dominance hierarchies. Anim Behav 83:925–934CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Sih A, Watters JV (2005) The mix matters: behavioural types and group dynamics in water striders. Behaviour 142:1417–1431CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Sih A, Bell A, Johnson JC (2004) Behavioral syndromes: an ecological and evolutionary overview. Trends Ecol Evol 19:372–378PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Sih A, Hanser SF, McHugh KA (2009) Social network theory: new insights and issues for behavioral ecologists. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 63:975–988CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sih A, Cote J, Evans M, Fogarty S, Pruitt J (2012) Ecological implications of behavioural syndromes. Ecol Lett 15:278–289PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Webster MM, Ward AJW (2011) Personality and social context. Biol Rev 86:759–773PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Wey T, Blumstein DT, Shen W, Jordan F (2008) Social network analysis of animal behaviour: a promising tool for the study of sociality. Anim Behav 75:333–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Wilson ADM, Krause J (2012a) Metamorphosis and animal personality: a neglected opportunity. Trends Ecol Evol 27:529–531PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Wilson ADM, Krause J (2012b) Personality and metamorphosis: is behavioral variation consistent across ontogenetic niche shifts? Behav Ecol. doi: 10.1093/beheco/ars123
  51. Wilson ADM, Godin J-GJ, Ward AJW (2010a) Boldness and reproductive fitness correlates in the eastern mosquitofish, Gambusia holbrooki. Ethology 116:96–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Wilson AJ, Réale D, Clements MN, Morrissey MM, Postma E, Walling CA, Kruuk LEB, Nussey DH (2010b) An ecologist's guide to the animal model. J Anim Ecol 79:13–26PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Wolf M, Weissing FJ (2010) An explanatory framework for adaptive personality differences. Philos T R Soc B 365:3959–3968CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Wolf M, Weissing FJ (2012) Animal personalities: consequences for ecology and evolution. Trends Ecol Evol 27:452–461PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alexander D. M. Wilson
    • 1
  • Stefan Krause
    • 3
  • Niels J. Dingemanse
    • 4
    • 5
  • Jens Krause
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of the Biology and Ecology of FishesLeibniz-Institute of Freshwater Ecology and Inland FisheriesBerlinGermany
  2. 2.Humboldt UniversityBerlinGermany
  3. 3.Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer ScienceLübeck University of Applied SciencesLübeckGermany
  4. 4.Behavioural Ecology, Department of Biology IILudwig-Maximilians-University of MunichMunichGermany
  5. 5.Evolutionary Ecology of Variation GroupMax Planck Institute for OrnithologySeewiesenGermany

Personalised recommendations