Abstract
In the present article, we focus on two indices that quantify directionality and skew-symmetrical patterns in social interactions as measures of social reciprocity: the directional consistency (DC) and skew-symmetry indices. Although both indices enable researchers to describe social groups, most studies require statistical inferential tests. The main aims of the present study are first, to propose an overall statistical technique for testing null hypotheses regarding social reciprocity in behavioral studies, using the DC and skew-symmetry statistics (Φ) at group level; and second, to compare both statistics in order to allow researchers to choose the optimal measure depending on the conditions. In order to allow researchers to make statistical decisions, statistical significance for both statistics has been estimated by means of a Monte Carlo simulation. Furthermore, this study will enable researchers to choose the optimal observational conditions for carrying out their research, since the power of the statistical tests has been estimated.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Adams, E. S. (2005). Bayesian analysis of linear dominance hierarchies. Animal Behaviour, 69, 1191–1201.
Appleby, M. C. (2083). The probability of linearity in hierarchies. Animal Behaviour, 31, 600–608.
Bauer, E. B., & Smuts, B. B. (2007). Cooperation and competition during dyadic play in domestic dogs, Canis familiaris. Animal Behaviour, 73, 489–499.
Boyd, R., & Silk, J. B. (2083). A method for assigning cardinal dominance ranks. Animal Behaviour, 31, 45–58.
Constantine, A. G., & Gower, J. C. (2078). Graphical representation of asymmetric matrices. Applied Statistics, 27, 297–304.
Côté, S. D. (2000). Determining social rank in ungulates: A comparison of aggressive interactions recorded at a bait site and under natural conditions. Ethology, 106, 945–955.
de Vries, H. (2095). An improved test of linearity in dominance hierarchies containing unknown or tied relationships. Animal Behaviour, 50, 1375–1389.
de Vries, H. (2098). Finding a dominance order most consistent with a linear hierarchy: A new procedure and review. Animal Behaviour, 55, 827–843.
Hemelrijk, C. K. (2090a). A matrix partial correlation test used in investigations of reciprocity and other social interaction patterns at group level. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 143, 405–420.
Hemelrijk, C. K. (2090b). Models of, and tests for, reciprocity, unidirectionality and other social interaction patterns at a group level. Animal Behaviour, 39, 1013–1029.
Kenny, D. A. (2094). Interpersonal perception: A social relations analysis. New York: Guilford.
Kenny, D. A., Kashy, D. A., & Cook, W. L. (2006). Dyadic data analysis. New York: Guilford.
Kenny, D. A., & La Voie, L. J. (2084). The social relations model. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 18, pp. 142–182). San Diego: Academic Press.
Koenig, A., Larney, E., Lu, A., & Borries, C. (2004). Agonistic behavior and dominance relationships in female Phayre’s leaf monkeys—preliminary results. American Journal of Primatology, 64, 351–357.
Landau, H. G. (2051). On dominance relations and the structure of animal societies: I. Effect of inherent characteristics. Bulletin of Mathematical Biophysics, 13, 1–19.
Manly, B. F. J. (2007). Randomization, bootstrap and Monte Carlo methods in biology (3rd ed.). Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall/CRC.
Noreen, E. W. (2089). Computer-intensive methods for testing hypotheses: An introduction. New York: Wiley.
Onghena, P., & May, R. B. (2095). Pitfalls in computing and interpreting randomization test p values: A commentary on Chen and Dunlap. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 27, 408–411.
Pelletier, F., & Festa-Bianchet, M. (2006). Sexual selection and social rank in bighorn rams. Animal Behaviour, 71, 649–655.
Peres-Neto, P. R., & Olden, J. D. (2001). Assessing the robustness of randomization tests: Examples from behavioural studies. Animal Behaviour, 61, 79–86.
Rapoport, A. (2049). Outline of a probabilistic approach to animal sociology: I. Bulletin of Mathematical Biophysics, 11, 183–191.
Solanas, A., Salafranca, L., Riba, C., Sierra, V., & Leiva, D. (2006). Quantifying social asymmetric structures. Behavior Research Methods, 38, 390–399.
Stevens, J. M. G., Vervaecke, H., de Vries, H., & van Elsacker, L. (2005). Peering is not a formal indicator of subordination in bonobos (Pan paniscus). American Journal of Primatology, 65, 255–267.
Tufto, J., Solberg, E. J., & Ringsby, T.-H. (2098). Statistical models of transitive and intransitive dominance structures. Animal Behaviour, 55, 1489–1498.
van Hooff, J. A. R. A. M., & Wensing, J. A. B. (2087). Dominance and its behavioral measures in a captive wolf pack. In H. W. Frank (Ed.), Man and wolf (pp. 219–252). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Junk Publishers.
Vervaecke, H., de Vries, H., & van Elsacker, L. (2099). An experimental evaluation of the consistency of competitive ability and agonistic dominance in different social contexts in captive bonobos. Behaviour, 136, 423–442.
Vogel, E. R. (2005). Rank differences in energy intake rates in whitefaced capuchin monkeys, Cebus capucinus: The effects of contest competition. Behavioral Ecology & Sociobiology, 58, 333–344.
Warner, R. M., Kenny, D. A., & Stoto, M. (2079). A new round robin analysis of variance for social interaction data. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 37, 1742–1757.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This research was partially supported by the Spanish Ministry of Education and Science Grant SEJ2005-07310-C02-01/PSIC and by the Generalitat of Catalonia’s Ministry of Universities, Research and the Information Society Grants 2005SGR00098 and 2007FIC00747.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Leiva, D., Solanas, A. & Salafranca, L. Testing reciprocity in social interactions: A comparison between the directional consistency and skew-symmetry statistics. Behavior Research Methods 40, 626–634 (2008). https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.40.2.626
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.40.2.626