The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Tolerance for inequity may increase with social closeness in chimpanzees
Abstract
Economic decision–making depends on our social environment. Humans tend to respond differently to inequity in close relationships, yet we know little about the potential for such variation in other species. We examine responses to inequity in several groups of chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) in a paradigm similar to that used previously in capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella). We demonstrate that, like capuchin monkeys, chimpanzees show a response to inequity of rewards that is based upon the partner receiving the reward rather than the presence of the reward alone. However, we also found a great amount of variation between groups tested, indicating that chimpanzees, like people, respond to inequity in a variable manner, which we speculate could be caused by such variables as group size, the social closeness of the group (as reflected in length of time that the group has been together) and group–specific traditions.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
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?
In the citing paper
“Their findings illustrate that the animals refused to collaborate if they watched a conspecific obtain a more desirable food reward for equal or even less effort [56,57].”
From Therapy Dog Welfare Revisited: A Review of the Literature (2021) · cites this paper as [57]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Experimental Design and Data Analysis for Biologists
Quinn, G. P., & Keough, M. J. (2002) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511806384 · Cited by 10,674 · cited 1×
“Methods followed Quinn & Keough (2002) and tests were performed using SAS v. 8.2.”
MethodInfluentialFehr, E., & Fischbacher, U. (2003) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature02043 · Cited by 3,475 · cited 1×
“Inequity aversion (IA) appears to have played a key role in the evolution of cooperation in humans (Fehr & Fischbacher 2003), yet little is known about how other species respond to unequal pay-offs.”
BackgroundReconciliation in captive chimpanzees: A reevaluation with controlled methods
Preuschoft, S., Wang, X., Aureli, F., & de Waal, F. B. M. (2002) · International Journal of Primatology · doi:10.1023/a:1013293623158 · Cited by 69
Research works printed but not linked: 21
- 10.1002/(SICI)1098-2345(1997)41:3<213::AID-AJP4>3.0.CO;2-# · DOI
- 10.1002/1098-2345(200007)51:3<161::AID-AJP1>3.0.CO;2-5 · DOI
- Boehm C. 1999 Hierarchy in the forest: the evolution of egalitarian behavior. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press. · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1038/nature01963 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1075/eoc.4.2.05bro · DOI
- 10.1038/428140b · DOI
- 10.1159/000080209 · DOI
- Clark M. S. & Grote N. K. 2003 Close relationships. In Handbook of psychology: personality and social psychology (ed. T. Millon & M. J. Lerner) pp. 447-461. New York: Wiley. · DOI
- Dana J. D. Weber R. A. & Kuang J. 2003 Exploiting moral wriggle room: behavior inconsistent with a preference for fair outcomes. Carnegie Mellon Behavioral Decision Research working paper no. 349. See http://papers.ssrn. com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id¼ 400900 · DOI
- 10.1016/0047-2484(89)90074-2 · DOI
- de Waal F. B. M. 1996 Good natured: the origins of right and wrong in humans and other animals. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
- 10.1016/S1090-5138(97)00085-8 · DOI
- de Waal F. B. M. & Brosnan S. F. 2004 Simple and complex reciprocity in primates. In Cooperation in primates and humans: evolution and mechanisms (ed. P. Kapeller & C. P. van Schaik). Berlin: Springer.
- Dugatkin L. A. 1997 Cooperation among animals: an evolutionary perspective. New York: Oxford University Press. · DOI
- 10.1162/003355399556151 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1006/anbe.1999.1377 · DOI
- 10.1037/0022-3514.57.3.426 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1002/zoo.10003 · DOI
- Tomasello M. 1999 The cultural origins of human cognition. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press. · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1038/21415 · DOI
- Wolfinger R. & Chang M. 1995 Comparing the SAS. 1 GLM and MIXED procedures for repeated measures. In Proc. 20th Ann. SAS Users Group Conf. pp. 1-11.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
“Economic man” in cross-cultural perspective: behavioral experiments in 15 small-scale societies
Henrich, J., Boyd, R., Bowles, S., Camerer, C., Fehr, E., Gintis, H., McElreath, R., Alvard, M., Barr, A., Ensminger, J., et al. (2005) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x05000142 · Cited by 1,898
Darwin's mistake: Explaining the discontinuity between human and nonhuman minds
Penn, D. C., Holyoak, K. J., & Povinelli, D. J. (2008) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x08003543 · Cited by 1,174
Cooperative Breeding and Human Cognitive Evolution
Burkart, J. M., Hrdy, S. B., & Van Schaik, C. P. (2009) · Evolutionary Anthropology: Issues, News, and Reviews · doi:10.1002/evan.20222 · Cited by 646
Normative foundations of human cooperation
Fehr, E., & Schurtenberger, I. (2018) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-018-0385-5 · Cited by 434
Engineering cooperation in chimpanzees: tolerance constraints on cooperation.
Melis, A. P., Hare, B., & Tomasello, M. (2006) · Animal Behaviour · doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2005.09.018 · Cited by 427
Metadata
- Authors
- Brosnan, S. F., Schiff, H. C., & de Waal, F. B. M.
- Affiliations
- Yerkes National Primate Research Center, Emory University954 North Gatewood Drive, Atlanta, GA 30329USA
- Venue
- Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
- Publisher
- The Royal Society
- Published
- 2005-02-04
- Volume
- 272
- Issue
- 1560
- Pages
- 253-258
- ISSN
- 0962-8452
- 1471-2954
- Cited by
- 263
- References
- 3
- Language
- en
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
