ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2024
Models of animal coalitions and their implications for human evolution.
Article in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Models of animal coalitions and their implications for human evolution.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
Social interaction is a prime driver for the evolution of animal behaviour. Dyadic interaction, in particular, has been the focus of intensive research on the evolution of mutualistic, altruistic, selfish or spiteful behaviours. Meanwhile, triadic interaction has been the minimal framework for the study of animal coalition as observed in some species of primates, as well as in carnivores and cetaceans, where two or more individuals act jointly against a third party in a competitive context. Previous mathematical models of animal coalition have either failed to explain the observed diversity in the configuration of coalition or presumed fine-tuned decision-making that may be unrealistic for non-human animals. To approach these issues, the present study develops a new model that is fairly simple, but still able to account for the observed diversity in animal coalitions. Analysis of the model specifies key parameters affecting the predicted types of coalition: the nature of the benefit being contested, the cost-to-benefit ratio associated with fighting and the synergistic effect in coalition formation. Additionally, the model is used to evaluate the social selection hypothesis, which claims that coalition formation induced social selection favouring reduced aggression and lower fighting abilities during human evolution.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.