Dominance hierarchy and spatial distribution in captive red-capped mangabeys (iCercocebus torquatus torquatus/i): Testing Hemelrijks agent-based model
Interaction Studies 12 (3):461-473 (2012)
| Abstract | We empirically tested Hemelrijk's agent-based model (Hemelrijk 1998), in which dyadic agonistic interaction between primate-group subjects determines their spatial distribution and whether or not the dominant subject has a central position with respect to the other subjects. We studied a group of captive red-capped mangabeys ( Cercocebus torquatus torquatus ) that met the optimal conditions for testing this model (e.g. a linear dominance hierarchy). We analyzed the spatial distribution of the subjects in relation to their rank in the dominance hierarchy and the results confirmed the validity of this model. In accordance with Hemelrijk's model (Hemelrijk 1998), the group studied showed an ambiguity-reducing strategy that led to non-central spatial positioning on the part of the dominant subject, thus confirming the model indirectly. Nevertheless, for the model to be confirmed directly, the group has to adopt a risk-sensitive strategy so that observers can study whether dominant subjects develop spatial centrality. Our study also demonstrated that agent-based models are a good tool for the study of certain complex behaviors observed in primates because these explanatory models can help formulate suggestive hypotheses for exploring new lines of research in primatology. Keywords: Dominance-hierarchy rank; spatial distribution; Cercocebus torquatus ; agent-based models | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,705 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesRoman Frigg (2008). Models in Science. In Edward N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
J. Gregory Trafton & Anthony M. Harrison (2011). Embodied Spatial Cognition. Topics in Cognitive Science 3 (4):686-706.
Roman Frigg & Stephan Hartmann (2005). Scientific Models. In Sahotra Sarkar et al (ed.), The Philosophy of Science: An Encyclopedia, Vol. 2. Routledge.
Zenon W. Pylyshyn (2004). From Reifying Mental Pictures to Reifying Spatial Models. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (4):590-591.
Andre Vandierendonck (1996). Evidence for Mental-Model-Based Reasoning: A Comparison of Reasoning with Time and Space Concepts. Thinking and Reasoning 2 (4):249 – 272.
Sergio Morra (2001). On the Information-Processing Demands of Spatial Reasoning. Thinking and Reasoning 7 (4):347 – 365.
Daniel M. Merfeld (2004). Internal Models and Spatial Orientation. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (3):410-410.
Jukka Corander & Pekka Marttinen (2006). Bayesian Model Learning Based on Predictive Entropy. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 15 (1-2).
Denis Phan & Franck Varenne (2010). Agent-Based Models and Simulations in Economics and Social Sciences: From Conceptual Exploration to Distinct Ways of Experimenting. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation 13 (1).
Barbara Applebaum (2001). Raising Awareness of Dominance: Does Recognising Dominance Mean One has to Dismiss the Values of the Dominant Group? Journal of Moral Education 30 (1):55-70.
Stephan Hartmann & Roman Frigg (2006). Models in Science. In Ed Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Stanford.
Denise Dellarosa Cummins (1996). Dominance Hierarchies and the Evolution of Human Reasoning. Minds and Machines 6 (4).
Shino Shiode (2008). Analysis of a Distribution of Point Events Using the Network-Based Quadrat Method. Geographical Analysis 40 (4):380-400.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2011-12-07Total downloads2 ( #232,628 of 549,224 )Recent downloads (6 months)0How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
