Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The influence of social experience on cooperative behaviour of rats (Rattus norvegicus): direct vs generalised reciprocity

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Cooperation among non-kin has been attributed sometimes to reciprocal altruism: Two or more individuals exchange behaviour that benefits the respective partner. According to direct reciprocity, cooperation is based on past behaviour of a known partner. In contrast, in generalised reciprocity, cooperation is based on anonymous social experience where the identity of the partner is irrelevant. In a previous study, female Norway rats (Rattus norvegicus) were found to cooperate according to a generalised reciprocity mechanism. In this study, we tested whether Norway rats would also cooperate as predicted by a direct reciprocity mechanism and whether direct reciprocity would cause a higher propensity to cooperate than generalised reciprocity. Focal animals were experimentally manipulated to receive social experience from known or unknown, helpful or defecting partners in an instrumental cooperative task. Our first experiment shows that rats are more helpful towards a partner from which they had received help before than towards a partner that had not helped (i.e. direct reciprocity). Our second experiment revealed that after receiving help by others, rats were more helpful towards a partner from which they had received help before than towards a new partner (i.e. direct reciprocity generated a higher cooperation propensity than generalised reciprocity). We conclude that in female Norway rats, the tendency to cooperate is influenced by partner-specific information. To our knowledge, this is the first study to demonstrate direct reciprocity in rodents, and it is the first study testing direct vs generalised reciprocity in animals.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alexander RD (1987) The biology of moral systems. Aldine de Gruyter, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Axelrod R, Hamilton WD (1981) The evolution of cooperation. Science 211:1390–1396

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Barrett L, Henzi SP, Weingrill T, Lycett JE, Hill RA (2000) Female baboons do not raise the stakes but they give as good as they get. Anim Behav 59:763–770

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Berkowitz L, Daniels L (1964) Affecting the salience of the social responsibility norm: effects of past help on the response to dependency relationships. J Abnorm Soc Psychol 68:275–281

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Boyd R, Richerson PJ (1989) The evolution of indirect reciprocity. Soc Netw 11:213–236

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brosnan SF, de Waal FBM (2002). A proximate perspective on reciprocal altruism. Hum Nat 13:129–152 (An Interdisciplinary Biosocial Perspective)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bshary R, Grutter AS (2006) Image scoring and cooperation in a cleaner fish mutualism. Nature 441:975–978

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Burman OHP, Mendl M (2000) Short-term social memory in the laboratory rat: its susceptibility to disturbance. Appl Anim Behav Sci 67:241–254

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Clements KC, Stephens DW (1995) Testing models of non-kin cooperation: mutualism and the Prisoner’s Dilemma. Anim Behav 50:527–535

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Waal FBM (1997) Food transfers through mesh in brown capuchins. J Comp Psychol 111:370–378

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • De Waal FBM, Berger ML (2000) Payment for labour in monkeys. Nature 404:563

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dugatkin A (1997) Cooperation among animals. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Dugatkin LA, Alfieri M (1991) Guppies and the TIT FOR TAT strategy: preference based on past interaction. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 28:243–246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gheusi G (1997) Individually distinctive odours represent individual conspecifics in rats. Anim Behav 53:935–944

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gheusi G, Bluthé R-M, Goodall G, Dantzer R (1994) Social and individual recognition in rodents: methodological aspects and neurobiological bases. Behav Processes 33:59–88

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Godard R (1993) Tit for tat among neighbouring hooded warblers. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 33:45–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton IM, Taborsky M (2005) Contingent movement and cooperation under generalized reciprocity. Proc R Soc B 272:2259–2267

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hauser MD, Chen MK, Chen F, Chuang E (2003) Give unto others: genetically unrelated cotton-top tamarin monkeys preferentially give food to those who altruistically give food back. Proc R Soc B 270:2363–2370

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hsu Y, Wolf LL (1999) The winner and loser effect: integrating multiple experiences. Anim Behav 57:903–910

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kosfeld M, Heinrichs M, Zak PJ, Fischbacher U, Fehr E (2005) Oxytocin increases trust in humans. Nature 435:673–676

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Krams I, Krama T (2002) Interspecific reciprocity explains mobbing behaviour of the breeding chaffinches, Fringilla coelebs. Proc R Soc Lond B 269:2345–2350

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leimar O, Hammerstein P (2001) Evolution of cooperation through indirect reciprocity. Proc R Soc B 268:745–753

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Milinski M, Wedekind C (1998) Working memory constrains human cooperation in the Prisoner’s Dilemma. Proc Natl Acad Sci 95:13755–13758

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Milinski M, Pfluger D, Külling D, Kettler R (1990) Do sticklebacks cooperate repeatedly in reciprocal pairs? Behav Ecol Sociobiol 27:17–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milinski M, Semmann D, Bakker TCM, Krambeck HJ (2001) Cooperation through indirect reciprocity: image scoring or standing strategy? Proc R Soc B 268:2495–2501

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Nowak MA, Sigmund K (1994) The alternating Prisoner’s Dilemma. J Theor Biol 168:219–356

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nowak MA, Sigmund K (1998) The dynamics of indirect reciprocity. J Theor Biol 194:561–574

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Nowak MA, Sigmund K (2005) Evolution of indirect reciprocity. Nature 437:1291–1298

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Olendorf R, Getty T, Scribner K (2004) Cooperative nest defence in red-winged blackbirds: reciprocal altruism, kinship or by-product mutualism? Proc R Soc Lond B 271:177–182

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pfeiffer T, Rutte C, Killingback T, Taborsky M, Bonhoeffer S (2005) Evolution of cooperation through generalized reciprocity. Proc R Soc B 272:1115–1120

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rilling JK, Gutman DA, Zeh TR, Pagnoni G, Berns GS, Kilts CD (2002) A neural basis for social cooperation. Neuron 35:395–405

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rutte C, Taborsky M (2007) Generalized reciprocity in rats. PLoS PLoS Biol 5(7):e196

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rutte C, Brinkhof MWG, Taborsky M (2006) What sets the odds of winning and losing? Trends Ecol Evol 21:16–21

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schuster R (2002) Cooperative coordination as a social behavior—experiments with an animal model. Hum Nat 13:47–83 (An Interdisciplinary Biosocial Perspective)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schuster R, Perelberg A (2004) Why cooperate? An economic perspective is not enough. Behav Processes 66:261–277

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Semmann D, Krambeck HJ, Milinski M (2005) Reputation is valuable within and outside one’s own social group. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 57:611–616

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stephens DW, Anderson JP, Benson KE (1997) On the spurious occurrence of Tit for Tat in pairs of predator-approaching fish. Anim Behav 53:113–131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stevens JR, Hauser MD (2004) Why be nice? Psychological constraints on the evolution of cooperation. Trends Cogn Sci 8:60–65

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Stevens JR, Cushman FA, Hauser MD (2005) Evolving the psychological mechanisms for cooperation. Ann Rev Ecolog Syst 36:499–518

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Telle H-J (1966) Beitrag zur Kenntnis der Verhaltensweise von Ratten, vergleichend dargestellt bei Rattus norvegicus und Rattus rattus. Z für Angewandte Zoologie 53:129–196

    Google Scholar 

  • Trivers R (1971) The evolution of reciprocal altruism. Quart Rev Biol 46:35–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uvnas-Moberg K (1998) Oxytocin may mediate the benefits of positive social interaction and emotions. Psychoneuroendocrinology 23:819–835

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wedekind C, Milinski M (2000) Cooperation through image scoring in humans. Science 288:850–852

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • White NM, Hiroi N (1998) Preferential localization of self-stimulation sites in striosomes/patches in the rat striatum. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 95:6486–6491

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wilkinson GS (1984) Reciprocal food sharing in the vampire bat. Nature 308:181–184

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to anonymous referees for helpful comments on an earlier version of the manuscript. The housing of the rats and the experimental procedure adhered to the Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour Guidelines for the Use of Animals in Research and were approved by the Swiss Federal Veterinary Office.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Behavioural Ecology, University of Bern, Wohlenstr. 50 a, 3032, Hinterkappelen, Switzerland

    Claudia Rutte & Michael Taborsky

Authors
  1. Claudia Rutte
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michael Taborsky
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Claudia Rutte.

Additional information

Communicated by F. Trillmich.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Rutte, C., Taborsky, M. The influence of social experience on cooperative behaviour of rats (Rattus norvegicus): direct vs generalised reciprocity. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 62, 499–505 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-007-0474-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-007-0474-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation