Dominance hierarchy and spatial distribution in captive red-capped mangabeys : Testing Hemelrijk’s agent-based model
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Interaction Studies 12 (3):461-473 (2011)
We empirically tested Hemelrijk's agent-based model, 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 that met the optimal conditions for testing this model. 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, 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||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Roman 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):5-20.
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):463-480.
Shino Shiode (2008). Analysis of a Distribution of Point Events Using the Network-Based Quadrat Method. Geographical Analysis 40 (4):380-400.
Added to index2011-12-07
Total downloads6 ( #441,727 of 1,790,336 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #431,681 of 1,790,336 )
How can I increase my downloads?