Regular ArticleAggressive interactions and inter-contest interval: how long do winners keep winning?.
Abstract
Abstract. Considerable evidence across many taxa demonstrates that prior social experience affects the outcome of subsequent aggressive interactions. Although the 'loser effect', in which an individual losing one encounter is likely to lose the next, is relatively well understood, studies of the 'winner effect', in which winning one encounter increases the probability of winning the next, have produced mixed results. Earlier studies differ concerning whether a winner effect exists, and if it does, how long it lasts. The variation in results, however, may arise from different inter-contest intervals and procedures for selecting contestants employed across previous studies. These methodological differences are addressed through a series of experiments using randomly selected winners and three different inter-contest intervals in the pumpkinseed sunfish, Lepomis gibbosus. The results indicate that a winner effect does in fact exist in pumpkinseed sunfish, but that it only lasts between 15 and 60 min. Based on these results, predictions about the behavioural dynamics of hierarchy formation are discussed, and it is suggested that it may be impossible, in principle, to predict the outcome of dominance interactions between some individuals before they are actually assembled to form a group. Finally, the possible mechanisms underlying the winner effect are explored.
References (0)
Cited by (272)
Winner and loser effects in humans: evidence from randomized trials
2024, Animal BehaviourIn many animals, contest winners are more likely to win subsequent matches while contest losers tend to lose their later fights. Such winner and loser effects can have long-lasting impacts on individual behaviour and fitness. Recent observations suggest that winner and loser effects may occur in humans, and we thus critically tested this proposition in two experiments involving video games and reading comprehension. We randomly assigned human participants to either win or lose in phase 1 by manipulating their task difficulty. Then we tested their performance in phase 2, which was moderately difficult for all participants. In both experiments, randomly assigned phase 1 winners performed significantly better in phase 2 than did randomly assigned phase 1 losers. The effect size was higher in the video game experiment than in the reading comprehension test, perhaps because the former involved an overt contest with one winner and one loser. Finally, men and women exhibited similar magnitudes of winner and loser effects. Our experimental approach as well as further critical experiments with humans can help us better understand winner and loser effects in general as well as their possible important influence on human performance.
Coup in the coop: Rank changes in chicken dominance hierarchies over maturation
2023, Behavioural ProcessesChicken dominance hierarchies or pecking orders are established before maturation and maintained by consistent submissive responses of subordinate individuals, leading to stable ranks within unchanged groups. We observed interactions of 418 laying hens (Gallus gallus domesticus) distributed across three small (20) and three large (∼120) groups. The observations were performed before sexual maturation (young period) and additionally after onset of maturation (mature period) to confirm stability of ranks. Dominance ranks were estimated via the Elo rating system across both observation periods. Diagnostics of the ranks revealed unexpected uncertainty and rank instability for the full dataset, although sampling appeared to be adequate. Subsequent evaluations of ranks based on the mature period only, showed more reliable ranks than across both observation periods. Furthermore, winning success during the young period did not directly predict high rank during the mature period. These results indicated rank changes between observation periods. The current study design could not discern whether ranks were stable in all pens before maturation. However, our data rather suggested active rank mobility after hierarchy establishment to be the cause for our findings. Once thought to be stable, chicken hierarchies may provide an excellent system to study causes and implications of active rank mobility.
Non-angry aggressive arousal and angriffsberietschaft: A narrative review of the phenomenology and physiology of proactive/offensive aggression motivation and escalation in people and other animals
2023, Neuroscience and Biobehavioral ReviewsHuman aggression typologies largely correspond with those for other animals. While there may be no non-human equivalent of angry reactive aggression, we propose that human proactive aggression is similar to offense in other animals’ dominance contests for territory or social status. Like predation/hunting, but unlike defense, offense and proactive aggression are positively reinforcing, involving dopamine release in accumbens. The drive these motivational states provide must suffice to overcome fear associated with initiating risky fights. We term the neural activity motivating proactive aggression “non-angry aggressive arousal”, but use “angriffsberietschaft” for offense motivation in other animals to acknowledge possible differences. Temporal variation in angriffsberietschaft partitions fights into bouts; engendering reduced anti-predator vigilance, redirected aggression and motivational over-ride. Increased aggressive arousal drives threat-to-attack transitions, as in verbal-to-physical escalation and beyond that, into hyper-aggression. Proactive aggression and offense involve related neural activity states. Cingulate, insular and prefrontal cortices energize/modulate aggression through a subcortical core containing subnuclei for each aggression type. These proposals will deepen understanding of aggression across taxa, guiding prevention/intervention for human violence.
Winner effects and switching assessment strategies facilitate fast and frugal decisions in territorial contests
2020, Animal BehaviourAnimals compete in contests over limited resources, and contestants with greater fighting ability, or resource-holding potential (RHP), typically win contests. Contest strategies have evolved to balance contest costs with the benefit of winning resources. Sometimes, contestants decide to leave by estimating their opponent's relative RHP. This strategy (mutual assessment) is cost-effective because it allows weaker opponents to leave contests against formidable opponents before accruing higher costs. However, acquiring reliable information can be costly. Here, we showed that in snapping shrimp (Alpheus angulosus) contests, contestants assessed relative RHP quickly and cost-effectively by assessing their opponent's recent contest success. By staging 26 contests between randomly matched individuals and 24 contests between RHP-matched individuals, we determined that snapping shrimp assessed their opponent's RHP during initial contest phases but no longer assessed relative RHP during escalated phases. Then, after staging 24 contests between individuals with contest experience the day prior, we found that snapping shrimp integrated RHP and recent contest success to make contest decisions. This strategy facilitated fast and accurate judgments when the recent winner was also larger but often resulted in the larger individual retreating when facing a small recent winner. Notably, these systematic biases were corrected when RHP differences were stark. Taken together, our findings demonstrate that by assessing recent contest success early in a contest, snapping shrimp can avoid risky contests. Furthermore, by integrating recent contest success with direct observations of RHP, contestants avoid losing contests prematurely. Similar assessment strategies may be widespread, because they circumvent risky contests while minimizing premature defeats from weaker recent winners.
Evidence that Gulf toadfish use pulsatile urea excretion to communicate social status
2020, Physiology and BehaviorGulf toadfish (Opsanus beta), a highly territorial marine teleost species, are believed to communicate through chemicals released across the gill during pulsatile urea excretion. While freshwater teleost and crustacean urinary signals have been shown to relay information about dominance to reduce physical aggression in future encounters, the use of chemical signals to convey social status in marine teleosts is understudied. Behavior and urea excretion patterns were monitored in pairs of male toadfish during an initial agonistic encounter and in a 2nd encounter where a subset of pairs had their nares blocked to determine how olfaction, and thus chemical communication, play a role in establishing dominance. Anosmic toadfish did not experience increases in aggressive behavior, unlike other species previously studied. However, behavior and the pattern of urea excretion were disrupted in anosmic pairs compared to control pairs. Specifically, control subordinate fish had an increase in their dominance index during the 2nd encounter, a response that anosmic subordinate fish did not experience suggesting that without the ability to smell, subordinate fish cannot recognize their opponent and assess their fighting ability and have a reduced chance of winning. These anosmic subordinate fish also had an increase in pulse frequency, perhaps reflecting an increased effort in communication of status. Future research is needed to conclude if peaks in agonistic behavior are coordinated around the time of urea pules. However, the observed changes in behavior and pulsatile urea excretion due to anosmia in the present study provide evidence that toadfish use pulsatile urea excretion to release signals for chemical communication during agonistic encounters.