Premium
Social power, conflict policing, and the role of subordination signals in rhesus macaque society
Author(s) -
Beisner Brianne A.,
Hannibal Darcy L.,
Finn Kelly R.,
Fushing Hsieh,
McCowan Brenda
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
american journal of physical anthropology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.146
H-Index - 119
eISSN - 1096-8644
pISSN - 0002-9483
DOI - 10.1002/ajpa.22945
Subject(s) - subordination (linguistics) , dominance (genetics) , certainty , social psychology , macaque , power (physics) , psychology , transitive relation , sociology , biology , mathematics , neuroscience , philosophy , linguistics , physics , quantum mechanics , biochemistry , geometry , combinatorics , gene
Objectives Policing is a conflict‐limiting mechanism observed in many primate species. It is thought to require a skewed distribution of social power for some individuals to have sufficiently high social power to stop others' fights, yet social power has not been examined in most species with policing behavior. We examined networks of subordination signals as a source of social power that permits policing behavior in rhesus macaques. Materials and Methods For each of seven captive groups of rhesus macaques, we (a) examined the structure of subordination signal networks and used GLMs to examine the relationship between (b) pairwise dominance certainty and subordination network pathways and (c) policing frequency and social power (group‐level convergence in subordination signaling pathways). Results Networks of subordination signals had perfect linear transitivity, and pairs connected by both direct and indirect pathways of signals had more certain dominance relationships than pairs with no such network connection. Social power calculated using both direct and indirect network pathways showed a heavy‐tailed distribution and positively predicted conflict policing. Conclusions Our results empirically substantiate that subordination signaling is associated with greater dominance relationship certainty and further show that pairs who signal rarely (or not at all) may use information from others' signaling interactions to infer or reaffirm the relative certainty of their own relationships. We argue that the network of formal dominance relationships is central to societal stability because it is important for relationship stability and also supports the additional stabilizing mechanism of policing. Am J Phys Anthropol 160:102–112, 2016. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.