Who goes there? Social surveillance as a response to intergroup conflict in a primitive termite
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Thompson F
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7423038 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jul
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Intergroup conflict is widespread in nature and is proposed to have strong impacts on the evolution of social behavior. The conflict-cohesion hypothesis predicts that exposure to intergroup conflict should lead to increased social cohesion to improve group success or resilience in future conflicts. There is evidence to support this prediction from studies of affiliative responses to outgroup threats in some animal societies. However, most of these studies have focused on behavioral changes over short time periods (minutes and hours after exposure to an outgroup), and hence very little is known about the dynamics and durability of responses to intergroup conflict over the longer term. We investigated this question by simulating intergroup encounters in wild banded mongooses (Mungos mungo) and measuring social behavior before, during, and after these encounters over a 5-day period. We also ran control trials with non-threatening stimuli. Banded mongooses reacted immediately to intrusion stimuli by vocalizing, grouping together, and advancing on the stimulus. In the first 5 min after simulated intrusions, we saw an elevation in grooming levels, but in the hour after exposure grooming rates declined sharply, contrary to our expectation. In the two subsequent days, grooming rates remained at this depressed rate. In control trials, the initial increase in grooming was not seen, but grooming declined compared to the longer-term time periods. Grooming changed across time, but not in the same pattern as during intrusions, suggesting that intrusions had an impact above and beyond that of the experimental setup. The dynamics of grooming responses were short lived and more complex than we initially expected. We suggest this unexpected result may be linked to the frequency of aggressive intergroup encounters in this system. As control and experimental trials were run at different times of year, future work would be needed to confirm that these relative patterns are replicable. Our results indicate short-lived impacts of outgroup threat on measures of social cohesion in this species, but cannot confirm longer-term changes.
| S-EPMC8717285 | biostudies-literature
Project description:During a conflict, having a greater number of allies than the opposition can improve one's success in a conflict. However, allies must be aware that has a conflict has occurred, and this is often influenced by what they are able to see. Here, we explored whether infants' assessment of social dominance is influenced by whether or not social allies have visual access to an episode of intergroup conflict. In Experiment 1, 9-12-month-olds only expected an agent to be socially dominant if their allies were able to witness the conflict. Experiment 2 provided further support for this finding, as infants did not expect an agent from a numerically larger group to be socially dominant when allies were unable to witness the conflict. Together, these results suggest that infants do not simply use a heuristic in which "numerically larger groups are always more dominant". Importantly, infants are able to incorporate social allies' ability to witness a conflict when predicting social dominance between groups.
| S-EPMC9617854 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The literature has been relatively silent about post-conflict processes. However, understanding the way humans deal with post-conflict situations is a challenge in our societies. With this in mind, we focus the present study on the rationality of cooperative decision making after an intergroup conflict, i.e., the extent to which groups take advantage of post-conflict situations to obtain benefits from collaborating with the other group involved in the conflict. Based on dual-process theories of thinking and affect heuristic, we propose that intergroup conflict hinders the rationality of cooperative decision making. We also hypothesize that this rationality improves when groups are involved in an in-group deliberative discussion. Results of a laboratory experiment support the idea that intergroup conflict -associated with indicators of the activation of negative feelings (negative affect state and heart rate)- has a negative effect on the aforementioned rationality over time and on both group and individual decision making. Although intergroup conflict leads to sub-optimal decision making, rationality improves when groups and individuals subjected to intergroup conflict make decisions after an in-group deliberative discussion. Additionally, the increased rationality of the group decision making after the deliberative discussion is transferred to subsequent individual decision making.
| S-EPMC4252077 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Intergroup conflict is evident throughout the history of our species, ubiquitous across human societies, and considered crucial for the evolution of humans' large-scale cooperative nature. Like humans, chimpanzee societies exhibit intragroup coordination and coalitionary support during violent intergroup conflicts. In both species, cooperation among group members is essential for individuals to gain access to benefits from engaging in intergroup conflict. Studies suggest that a contributive mechanism regulating in-group cooperation during intergroup conflicts in humans involves the neuropeptide hormone oxytocin, known to influence trust, coordination, and social cognition, although evidence from natural settings is lacking. Here, applying a noninvasive method, we investigate oxytocinergic system involvement during natural intergroup conflicts in wild chimpanzees. We found that chimpanzees of both sexes had significantly higher urinary oxytocin levels immediately before and during intergroup conflict compared with controls. Also, elevated hormone levels were linked with greater cohesion during intergroup conflicts, rather than with the level of potential threat posed by rival groups, intragroup affiliative social interactions, or coordinated behavior alone. Thus, the oxytocinergic system, potentially engendering cohesion and cooperation when facing an out-group threat, may not be uniquely human but rather a mechanism with evolutionary roots shared by our last common ancestor with chimpanzees, likely expediting fitness gains during intergroup conflict.
| S-EPMC5240673 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Theoreticians have long suggested that the amount of intergroup conflict in which a group is involved could influence the level of cooperation or affiliation displayed by its members. Despite the prevalence of intergroup conflicts in many social animal species, however, few empirical studies have investigated this potential link. Here, I show that intragroup allopreening rates are highest in green woodhoopoe (Phoeniculus purpureus) groups that have the greatest involvement in intergroup conflict. One reason for this relationship is a post-conflict increase in allopreening, and I demonstrate for the first time that both conflict duration and outcome influence subsequent allopreening rates: group members allopreened more following long conflicts and those they lost compared with short conflicts and those they won, perhaps because the former are more stressful. The increase in affiliative behaviour was the result of more allopreening of subordinate helpers by the dominant breeding pair, which may be because the breeders are trying to encourage helpers to participate in future conflicts; relative group size influences conflict outcome and helpers contribute more to conflicts than do the breeding pair. These results emphasize that our understanding of cooperation and group dynamics can be enhanced by investigations of how intergroup interactions affect intragroup processes.
| S-EPMC2605834 | biostudies-other
Project description:Revenge during intergroup conflict is a human universal, but its neurobiological underpinnings remain unclear. We address this by integrating functional MRI and measurements of endogenous oxytocin in participants who view an ingroup and an outgroup member's suffering that is caused mutually (Revenge group) or by a computer (Control group). We show that intergroup conflict encountered by the Revenge group is associated with an increased level of oxytocin in saliva compared to that in the Control group. Furthermore, the medial prefrontal activity in response to ingroup pain in the Revenge group but not in the Control group mediates the association between endogenous oxytocin and the propensity to give painful electric shocks to outgroup members, regardless of whether they were directly involved in the conflict. Our findings highlight an important neurobiological correlate of revenge propensity, which may be implicated in conflict contagion across individuals in the context of intergroup conflict.
| S-EPMC7058385 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Scientific abstractWe review social-psychological evidence for a theoretically integrative and dynamic model of intergroup conflict escalation within democratic societies. Viewing individuals as social regulators who protect their social embeddedness (e.g., in their group or in society), the intergroup value protection model (IVPM) integrates key insights and concepts from moral and group psychology (e.g., group identification, outrage, moralization, protest) into a functional intergroup value protection process. The model assumes that social regulators are continuously looking for information diagnostic of the outgroup's intentions to terminate the relationship with the ingroup, and that their specific cognitive interpretations of an outgroup's action (i.e., as a violation of ingroup or shared values) trigger this process. The visible value-protective responses of one group can trigger the other group's value-protective responses, thus dynamically increasing chances of conflict escalation. We discuss scientific implications of integrating moral and group psychology and practical challenges for managing intergroup conflict within democratic societies.Public abstractThe 2021 Capitol Hill attack exemplifies a major "trigger event" for different groups to protect their values within a democratic society. Which specific perceptions generate such a triggering event, which value-protective responses does it trigger, and do such responses escalate intergroup conflict? We offer the intergroup value protection model to analyze the moral and group psychology of intergroup conflict escalation in democratic societies. It predicts that when group members cognitively interpret another group's actions as violating ingroup or shared values, this triggers the intergroup value protection process (e.g., increased ingroup identification, outrage, moralization, social protest). When such value-protective responses are visible to the outgroup, this can in turn constitute a trigger event for them to protect their values, thus increasing chances of intergroup conflict escalation. We discuss scientific implications and practical challenges for managing intergroup value conflict in democratic societies, including fears of societal breakdown and scope for social change.
| S-EPMC11010547 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Intergroup conflict contributes to human discrimination and violence, but persists because individuals make costly contributions to their group's fighting capacity. Yet, how group members effectively coordinate their contributions during intergroup conflict remains poorly understood. Here, we examine the role of oxytocin for (the coordination of) contributions to group attack or defense in multi-round, real-time feedback intergroup contests. In a double-blind placebo-controlled study with N = 480 males in Intergroup Attacker-Defender Contests, we found that oxytocin reduced contributions to attack and over time increased attacker's within-group coordination of contributions. However, rather than becoming peaceful, attackers given oxytocin better tracked their rival's historical defense and coordinated their contributions into well-timed and hence more profitable attacks. Our results reveal coordination of contributions as a critical component of successful attacks and subscribe to the possibility that oxytocin enables individuals to contribute to in-group efficiency and prosperity even when doing so implies outsiders are excluded or harmed.Editorial noteThis article has been through an editorial process in which the authors decide how to respond to the issues raised during peer review. The Reviewing Editor's assessment is that all the issues have been addressed (see decision letter).
| S-EPMC6347450 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We report on two studies investigating the motivations ("ingroup love" and "outgroup hate") underlying individual participation in intergroup conflict between natural groups (fans of football clubs, supporters of political parties), by employing the Intergroup Prisoner's Dilemma Maximizing-Difference (IPD-MD) game. In this game group members can contribute to the ingroup (at a personal cost) and benefit ingroup members with or without harming members of an outgroup. Additionally, we devised a novel version of the IPD-MD in which the choice is between benefiting ingroup members with or without helping members of the outgroup. Our results show an overall reluctance to display outgroup hate by actively harming outgroup members, except when the outgroup was morality-based. More enmity between groups induced more outgroup hate only when it was operationalized as refraining from help.
| S-EPMC4518042 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In eusocial insects, the ability to discriminate nest-mates from non-nest-mates is widespread and ensures that altruistic actions are directed towards kin and agonistic actions are directed towards non-relatives. Most tests of nest-mate recognition have focused on hymenopterans, and suggest that cooperation typically evolves in tandem with strong antagonism towards non-nest-mates. Here, we present evidence from a phylogenetically and behaviourally basal termite species that workers discriminate members of foreign colonies. However, contrary to our expectations, foreign intruders were the recipients of more rather than less cooperative behaviour and were not subjected to elevated aggression. We suggest that relationships between groups may be much more peaceable in basal termites compared with eusocial hymenoptera, owing to energetic and temporal constraints on colony growth, and the reduced incentive that totipotent workers (who may inherit breeding status) have to contribute to self-sacrificial intergroup conflict.
| S-EPMC5180156 | biostudies-literature