O papel das relações sociais e da atenção social durante tarefas cooperativas em Callithrix jacchus
Several studies on nonhuman primates show that the relationships between individuals strongly influence the expression of cooperative behavior, both in natural environment and in captivity settings. Recent studies suggest that cooperative breeders present outstanding performance in tasks involving s...
Na minha lista:
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Outros Autores: | |
| Formato: | Dissertação |
| Idioma: | por |
| Publicado em: |
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte
|
| Assuntos: | |
| Endereço do item: | https://repositorio.ufrn.br/jspui/handle/123456789/17327 |
| Tags: |
Adicionar Tag
Sem tags, seja o primeiro a adicionar uma tag!
|
| Resumo: | Several studies on nonhuman primates show that the relationships between individuals
strongly influence the expression of cooperative behavior, both in natural environment and in
captivity settings. Recent studies suggest that cooperative breeders present outstanding
performance in tasks involving social cognition, such as cooperative tasks with experimental
apparatuses. In experimental research on this subject it is crucial to differentiate between real
cooperation (or communicative cooperation, mediated by social attention) and by-product
cooperation that results from simultaneous actions of individuals. The present study assessed,
in Callithrix jacchus, a cooperative breeder species, if social relationships and social attention
between subjects are important factors during performance in cooperative tasks. During the
experimental procedure the animals participated in three different cooperative tasks:
cooperation task, prosocial task and control task. Diverging from the literature, matrix
correlation tests revealed no significant relationship between grooming or proximity and the
execution of the tasks, suggesting that other factors such as age or hierarchy may have an
effect on the performance in cooperative tasks in this species. There was also no relationship
between the execution of the cooperative tasks and social glances, suggesting that there was
no social attention during the tasks. Moreover, there were lower rates of social glances in the
cooperative tasks as opposed to the control tasks. However, the small number of pulls in
prosocial tasks suggests that the animals distinguished between tasks that benefited only a
partner and tasks that generated benefits to themselves, choosing the latter. We conclude that,
for the tasks presented in this study, we could neither detect the role of social relationships on
the cooperative tasks nor assert that there were true cooperation and prosocial behavior |
|---|