-
Introduction
Page 1
-
Materials and Methods
Pages 2 - 3
-
-
Discussion
Pages 8 - 9
-
Conclusions
Page 10
-
References
Page 11
-
Figures 1- 8
Figures 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8
-
Tables I-IV
Tables I - II - III - IV
This study was designed to replicate in male monkeys an earlier study of the social interactions of male laboratory rats. The previous study led to the conclusion that social behavior could be understood in terms of the operation of a few motivational systems [Lehman & Adams, 1977]. Data from the previous study were critical for the formulation of a general theory of motivational systems as a reflection of discrete brain mechanisms of social behavior [Adams, 1979, 1980]. A preliminary report that compares the results of the rat and monkey studies, but which employs less sophisticated statistical techniques than the present study, has already been published [Adams, 1981].
As far as possible, the present study on monkeys replicates the methodology of the earlier study on rats. In each case, forty tests were conducted in which socially isolated adult males were paired and the resulting behavioral sequences were recorded as several simultaneous channels of communication: acts and postures; vocalizations; and (in the case of monkeys only) facial expressions. In each case there was vigorous sexual, aggressive, and grooming behavior between the paired animals, and the behavioral sequences depended upon the relative dominance of the two animals.
The type of sequence analysis used here, while similar to that used previously on the rat, is different from that used by previous investigators of primate behavior. Altmann [1962, 1965, 1968a, b] used sequence analysis for free-ranging rhesus monkeys, but he did not distinguish between-animal from within-animal behavior sequences and he did not separate channels of communication as we have done. Maurus and others [Maurus et al, 1975; Maurus & Pruscha, 1972, 1973; Hopf et al, 1974] used a completely different type of sequence analysis (a dendrogram method) to elucidate results of brain- stimulation in a small laboratory colony of squirrel monkeys. Maxim [1976, 1978a, b] analyzed behavioral sequences of paired rhesus monkeys in a laboratory, but his analysis required an assumption (unnecessary in our methods) that every behavioral sequence must be scaled within a one-dimensional scale of dominance-submission. Maxim's analysis did not distinguish channels of communication and did not include behaviors that occurred when the animals were not in direct contact. Van Hooff's study of chimpanzee interactions [1973] was similar in many respects to the present study, although he did not report results of between-animal interactions, and he did not separate simultaneous channels of communication.
By using stumptail macaques, we were able to build upon a rich tradition of study on this species. Behavioral categories, established under both laboratory and field conditions, have been described in detail by Bertrand [1969] and Chevalier-Skolnikoff [1974]. With some modifications, they are used as the basis for the categories in the present study.
 |
 |
 |