Advertisement

Comparative Economics: Using Experimental Economic Paradigms to Understand Primate Social Decision-Making

  • Julia Watzek
  • Mackenzie F. Smith
  • Sarah F. Brosnan
Chapter
Part of the Interdisciplinary Evolution Research book series (IDER)

Abstract

One of the goals of studying primate social cognition is to better understand how decision-making is similar or different across primate species, including humans. Recently, researchers have begun to use paradigms from experimental economics that allow for direct comparisons across species using identical or highly similar experimental approaches. In many cases, paradigms used extensively in humans, such as the Assurance Game, Matching Pennies Game, and Prisoner’s Dilemma, have been adapted for other species in order to understand how different payoff structures influence decision-making. This approach has been utilized to explore not only individual differences and the influence of the social environment on behavior, but also the ecological relevance of such paradigms to the species in question. This comprehensive exploration allows for the most robust understanding of the evolution and development of social decision-making.

Keywords

Game theory Cooperation Coordination Competition Inequity Comparative Social cognition 

References

  1. Belot M, Crawford VP, Heyes C (2013) Players of matching pennies automatically imitate opponents’ gestures against strong incentives. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 110:2763–2768CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Boesch C, Boesch H (1989) Hunting behavior of wild chimpanzees in the Tai national park. Am J Phys Anthropol 75:547–573CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brosnan SF (2006) Nonhuman species’ reactions to inequity and their implications for fairness. Soc Justice Res 19:153–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brosnan SF (2013) Justice- and fairness-related behaviors in nonhuman primates. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 110(Suppl 2):10416–10423CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Brosnan SF, de Waal FBM (2002) A proximate perspective on reciprocal altruism. Hum Nat 13:129–152CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Brosnan SF, de Waal FBM (2014) Evolution of responses to (un)fairness. Science 346:1251776CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. Brosnan SF, Freeman C, de Waal FBM (2006) Partner’s behavior, not reward distribution, determines success in an unequal cooperative task in capuchin monkeys. Am J Primatol 68:713–724CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Brosnan SF, Parrish AE, Beran MJ et al (2011) Responses to the assurance game in monkeys, apes, and humans using equivalent procedures. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 108:3442–3447CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Brosnan SF, Wilson BJ, Beran MJ (2012) Old world monkeys are more similar to humans than new world monkeys when playing a coordination game. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 279:1522–1530CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brosnan SF, Beran MJ, Parrish AE et al (2013) Comparative approaches to studying strategy: towards an evolutionary account of primate decision making. Evol Psychol 11:606–627CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Brosnan SF, Price SA, Leverett K, Prétôt L, Beran M, Wilson BJ (2017) Human and monkey responses in a symmetric game of conflict with asymmetric equilibria. J Econ Behav Organ 142:293–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bullinger AF, Wyman E, Melis AP, Tomasello M (2011) Coordination of chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) in a stag hunt game. Int J Primatol 32:1296–1310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Burkart JM, van Schaik C (2013) Group service in macaques (Macaca fuscata), capuchins (Cebus apella) and marmosets (Callithrix jacchus): a comparative approach to identifying proactive prosocial motivations. J Comp Psychol 127:212–225CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Camerer CF (2003) Behavioral game theory: experiments in strategic interaction. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  15. Cook R, Bird G, Lunser G et al (2012) Automatic imitation in a strategic context: players of rock-paper-scissors imitate opponents’ gestures. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 279:780–786CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Crofoot MC, Rubenstein DI, Maiya AS, Berger-Wolf TY (2011) Aggression, grooming and group-level cooperation in white-faced capuchins (Cebus capucinus): insights from social networks. Am J Primatol 73:821–833CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. de Waal FBM (2000) Attitudinal reciprocity in food sharing among brown capuchin monkeys. Anim Behav 60:253–261CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. de Waal FBM, Berger ML (2000) Payment for labour in monkeys. Nature 404:563CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. de Waal FBM, Davis JM (2003) Capuchin cognitive ecology: cooperation based on projected returns. Neuropsychologia 41:221–228CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Deaner RO, van Schaik CP, Johnson V (2006) Do some taxa have better domain-general cognition than others? A meta-analysis of nonhuman primate studies. Evol Psychol 4:149–196Google Scholar
  21. Dugatkin LA (1997) Cooperation among animals: an evolutionary perspective. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  22. Duguid S, Wyman E, Bullinger AF et al (2014) Coordination strategies of chimpanzees and human children in a stag hunt game. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 281:20141973CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Engelmann JM, Herrmann E (2016) Chimpanzees trust their friends. Curr Biol 26(2):252–256CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Engelmann JM, Herrmann E, Tomasello M (2015) Chimpanzees trust conspecifics to engage in low-cost reciprocity. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 282:20142803CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Fehr E, Schmidt KM (2006) The economics of fairness, reciprocity and altruism – experimental evidence and new theories. In: Kolm S-C, Ythier JM (eds) Handbook of the economics of giving, altruism and reciprocity. Elsevier, Philadelphia, pp 615–691Google Scholar
  26. Hall K, Lambeth SP, Schapiro SJ, Brosnan SF (2015) Chimpanzees respond differently to inequity based on relative food values. In: Abstracts of the 38th annual meeting of the American society of primatologists, Bend, 17–20 June 2015Google Scholar
  27. Haroush K, Williams ZM (2015) Neuronal prediction of opponent’s behavior during cooperative social interchange in primates. Cell 160:1233–1245CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  28. Henrich J, Boyd R, Bowles S et al (2001) In search of homo economicus: behavioral experiments in 15 small-scale societies. Am Econ Rev 91:73–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Jensen K, Tomasello M, Call J (2007) Chimpanzees are rational maximizers in an ultimatum game. Science 318:107–109CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Kaiser I, Jensen K, Call J, Tomasello M (2012) Theft in an ultimatum game: chimpanzees and bonobos are insensitive to unfairness. Biol Lett 8:942–945CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. Lau B, Glimcher PW (2005) Dynamic response-by-response models of matching behavior in rhesus monkeys. J Exp Anal Behav 84:555–579CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  32. Lotem A, Halpern JY (2012) Coevolution of learning and data-acquisition mechanisms: a model for cognitive evolution. Philos Trans R Soc B 367:2686–2694CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Martin CF, Bhui R, Bossaerts P et al (2014) Chimpanzee choice rates in competitive games match equilibrium game theory predictions. Sci Rep 4:5182CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  34. Melis AP, Hare B, Tomasello M (2006) Chimpanzees recruit the best collaborators. Science 311:1297–1300CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Melis AP, Hare B, Tomasello M (2008) Do chimpanzees reciprocate received favours? Anim Behav 76:951–962CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Mendres KA, de Waal FBM (2000) Capuchins do cooperate: the advantage of an intuitive task. Anim Behav 60:523–529CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Milinski M (2013) Chimps play fair in the ultimatum game. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 110:1978–1979CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Parrish AE, Brosnan SF, Beran BJ, Würsig MJ (2014) Differential responding by rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta) and humans (Homo sapiens) to variable outcomes in the assurance game. Anim Behav Cogn 1:215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Perry S (2003) Coalitionary aggression in white-faced capuchins, Cebus capucinus. In: de FBM W, Tyack P (eds) Animal social complexity: intelligence, culture and individualized societies. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, pp 111–114Google Scholar
  40. Prétôt L, Bshary R, Brosnan SF (2016) Comparing species’ decisions in a dichotomous choice task: adjusting task parameters improves performance in monkeys. Anim Cogn 19(4):819–834CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Proctor D, Williamson RA, de Waal FBM, Brosnan SF (2013) Chimpanzees play the ultimatum game. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 110:2070–2075CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Salwiczek LH, Prétôt L, Demarta L et al (2012) Adult cleaner wrasse outperform capuchin monkeys, chimpanzees and orangutans in a complex foraging task derived from cleaner – client reef fish cooperation. PLoS One 7:e49068CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  43. Santos LR, Rosati AG (2015) The evolutionary roots of human decision making. Annu Rev Psychol 66:321–347CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  44. Schino G (2007) Grooming and agonistic support: a meta-analysis of primate reciprocal altruism. Behav Ecol 18:115–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Silberberg A, Kearns D (2009) Memory for the order of briefly presented numerals in humans as a function of practice. Anim Cogn 12:405–407CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Smith P, Silberberg A (2010) Rational maximizing by humans (Homo sapiens) in an ultimatum game. Anim Cogn 13:671–677CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Smith MF, Watzek J, Brosnan SF (2018) The importance of a truly comparative methodology for comparative psychology. Int J Comp Psychol 31. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/6x91j98x
  48. Stevens JR, Hauser MD (2004) Why be nice? Psychological constraints on the evolution of cooperation. Trends Cogn Sci 8:60–65CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Suchak M, Eppley TM, Campbell MW, de Waal FBM (2014) Ape duos and trios: spontaneous cooperation with free partner choice in chimpanzees. PeerJ 2:e417CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  50. Watzek J, Rossettie MS, Raines AR, Brosnan SF (2015) More for me, less for you: capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) responses to inequity in a group setting. Paper presented at the 52nd annual conference of the animal behavior society, Anchorage, 10–14 June 2015Google Scholar
  51. Xiao E, Houser D (2005) Emotion expression in human punishment behavior. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 102:7398–7401CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Julia Watzek
    • 1
  • Mackenzie F. Smith
    • 1
  • Sarah F. Brosnan
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Psychology, Language Research CenterGeorgia State UniversityAtlantaUSA
  2. 2.Department of Philosophy, Neuroscience Institute, Center for Behavioral NeuroscienceGeorgia State UniversityAtlantaUSA

Personalised recommendations