Hierarchical development of dominance through the winner-loser effect and socio-spatial structure

Abstract

In many groups of animals the dominance hierarchy is linear. What mechanisms underlie this linearity of the dominance hierarchy is under debate. Linearity is often attributed to cognitively sophisticated processes, such as transitive inference and eavesdropping. An alternative explanation is that it develops via the winner-loser effect. This effect implies that after a fight has been decided the winner is more likely to win again, and the loser is more likely to lose again. Although it has been shown that dominance hierarchies may develop via the winner-loser effect, the degree of linearity of such hierarchies is unknown. The aim of the present study is to investigate whether a similar degree of linearity, like in real animals, may emerge as a consequence of the winner-loser effect and the socio-spatial structure of group members. For this purpose, we use the model DomWorld, in which agents group and compete and the outcome of conflicts is self-reinforcing. Here dominance hierarchies are shown to emerge. We analyse the dominance hierarchy, behavioural dynamics and network triad motifs in the model using analytical methods from a previous study on dominance in real hens. We show that when one parameter, representing the intensity of aggression, was set high in the model DomWorld, it reproduced many patterns of hierarchical development typical of groups of hens, such as its high linearity. When omitting from the model the winner-loser effect or spatial location of individuals, this resemblance decreased markedly. We conclude that the combination of the spatial structure and the winner-loser effect provide a plausible alternative for hierarchical linearity to processes that are cognitively more sophisticated. Further research should determine whether the winner-loser effect and spatial structure of group members also explains the characteristics of hierarchical development in other species with a different dominance style than hens.

Small group size promotes more egalitarian societies as modeled by the hawk-dove game

“…Thus, if the HDG approximately models the range of despotic to egalitarian societies as previously postulated [ 4 , 20 ], small group size is one way to evolve more egalitarian societies while keeping the intensity of aggression low. Theoretically, these simulation results help reconcile the predictions of the classical HDG that low frequencies of hawks require high costs of conflict with Hemerlrijk’s [ 6 , 7 , 41 ] DomWorld model, where low levels of aggression characterize egalitarian societies.…”

Bridging Species and Disciplines: Incorporating Sociological Frameworks into Animal Models of Addiction

“…This effect implies that the outcome of social conflicts can reinforce future behaviors, with winners becoming more likely to win again and losers more likely to lose. This phenomenon has implications for understanding how social victories and defeats can shape addiction-related behaviors [73]. Furthermore, the network motif architecture of dominance hierarchies has been examined, revealing that overall patterns of dominance relations are strikingly similar across different group types.…”

Behavioral and neural correlates of social hierarchy formation in a sex-changing fish

“…These fish often have harem or lek-like mating systems (Gemmell et al, 2019;Hodge et al, 2020), where a single male maintains a territory or breeding ground with multiple females (Benvenuto et al, 2017). While it is the male that holds the most dominant position, the females can arrange themselves further in the hierarchy, as has been observed in other species (Chase, 1982;Mills et al, 2018;Pini-Fitzsimmons et al, 2021;Van Haeringen and Hemelrijk, 2022). Often, the dominant female will change her behavior within minutes to hours after the removal of the male, with gonadal and morphological changes following on a scale of days to months (Liu et al, 2017;Todd et al, 2019).…”