CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 316Primate Behavior and EcologyAnimal Behavior and ReproductionEvolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior

A framework for studying social complexity

Open access
Kappeler, Peter M.·2019·Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology
DOI 10.1007/s00265-018-2601-8
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Social complexity has been one of the recent emerging topics in the study of animal and human societies, but the concept remains both poorly defined and understood. In this paper, I critically review definitions and studies of social complexity in invertebrate and vertebrate societies, arguing that the concept is being used inconsistently in studies of vertebrate sociality. Group size and cohesion define one cornerstone of social complexity, but the nature and patterning of social interactions contribute more to interspecific variation in social complexity in species with individual recognition and repeated interactions. Humans provide the only example where many other unique criteria are used, and they are the only species for which intraspecific variation in social complexity has been studied in detail. While there is agreement that complex patterns emerge at the group level as a result of simple interactions and as a result of cognitive abilities, there is consensus neither on their relative importance nor on the role of specific cognitive abilities in different lineages. Moreover, aspects of reproduction and parental care have also been invoked to characterize levels of social complexity, so that no single comprehensive measure is readily available. Because even fundamental components of social complexity are difficult to compare across studies and species because of inconsistent definitions and operationalization of key social traits, I define and characterize social organization, social structure, mating system, and care system as distinct components of a social system. Based on this framework, I outline how different aspects of the evolution of social complexity are being studied and suggest questions for future research. Animal and human societies differ in social complexity, i.e., the number and association patterns of group members as well as the nature and patterning of their social relationships, but the dimensions of social complexity, the processes that generate it, the selective forces that engender different levels of social complexity, and the evolutionary consequences of this variation remain to be comprehensively understood. Here, I offer a conceptual framework for the systematic and comparative studies of social complexity by defining its main components as well as their proximate and ultimate relationships.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00265-018-2601-8

Cites

190 of 190 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A consensus framework that adequately classifies the magnitude of social behavior among all animal taxa has not been developed.

    “A consensus framework that adequately classifies the magnitude of social behavior among all animal taxa has not been developed (but see Kappeler, 2019).”

    From The evolution of sociality and the polyvagal theory (2023) · cites this paper as Kappeler, 2019

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Kappeler PM (2012) The behavioral ecology of strepsirrhines and tar- siers. In: Mitani JC, Call J, Kappeler PM, Palombit R, Silk JB (eds) The evolution of primate societies. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 17-42
  2. Silk JB (2012) The adaptive value of sociality. In: Mitani JC, Call J, Kappeler PM, Palombit R, Silk JB (eds) The evolution of primate societies. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 552-564
  3. Whitehead H (2008) Analyzing animal societies. Chicago University Press, Chicago
  4. Wilson EO (1971) Insect societies. Belknap Press of Harvard University, Cambridge
  5. Wilson EO (1975) Sociobiology. Belknap Press of Harvard University, Cambridge

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Kappeler, P. M.
Affiliations
German Primate Center (DE)
Corresponding author
Kappeler, Peter M.
ORCID
Kappeler, Peter M.
Venue
Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2019-01
Volume
73
Issue
1
ISSN
  • 0340-5443 (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-0762
DOI
10.1007/s00265-018-2601-8
OpenAlex
W2911065214
Cited by
316
References
190
Citations by year
2026: 31 · 2025: 42 · 2024: 42 · 2023: 43 · 2022: 45 · 2021: 58 · 2020: 28 · 2019: 26 · 2018: 1
FWCI
49.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • GoeScholar The Publication Server of the Georg-August-Universität Göttingen (Georg-August-Universität Göttingen) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (KA 1082/37-1)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Primate Behavior and Ecology
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Animal Behavior and Reproduction
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
Keywords
social complexity, animal societies, social organization, social structure, mating systems, systems of care, group size, social cohesion, social interaction, individual recognition, cognitive ability, evolution of sociality, human society

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review