IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0158900.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Fragility of Individual-Based Explanations of Social Hierarchies: A Test Using Animal Pecking Orders

Author

Listed:
  • Ivan D Chase
  • W Brent Lindquist

Abstract

The standard approach in accounting for hierarchical differentiation in biology and the social sciences considers a hierarchy as a static distribution of individuals possessing differing amounts of some valued commodity, assumes that the hierarchy is generated by micro-level processes involving individuals, and attempts to reverse engineer the processes that produced the hierarchy. However, sufficient experimental and analytical results are available to evaluate this standard approach in the case of animal dominance hierarchies (pecking orders). Our evaluation using evidence from hierarchy formation in small groups of both hens and cichlid fish reveals significant deficiencies in the three tenets of the standard approach in accounting for the organization of dominance hierarchies. In consequence, we suggest that a new approach is needed to explain the organization of pecking orders and, very possibly, by implication, for other kinds of social hierarchies. We develop an example of such an approach that considers dominance hierarchies to be dynamic networks, uses dynamic sequences of interaction (dynamic network motifs) to explain the organization of dominance hierarchies, and derives these dynamic sequences directly from observation of hierarchy formation. We test this dynamical explanation using computer simulation and find a good fit with actual dynamics of hierarchy formation in small groups of hens. We hypothesize that the same dynamic sequences are used in small groups of many other animal species forming pecking orders, and we discuss the data required to evaluate our hypothesis. Finally, we briefly consider how our dynamic approach may be generalized to other kinds of social hierarchies using the example of the distribution of empty gastropod (snail) shells occupied in populations of hermit crabs.

Suggested Citation

  • Ivan D Chase & W Brent Lindquist, 2016. "The Fragility of Individual-Based Explanations of Social Hierarchies: A Test Using Animal Pecking Orders," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(7), pages 1-16, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0158900
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0158900
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0158900
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0158900&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0158900?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tzo Zen Ang & Andrea Manica, 2010. "Unavoidable limits on group size in a body size-based linear hierarchy," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 21(4), pages 819-825.
    2. Jack W. Bradbury & Sandra L. Vehrencamp, 2014. "Complexity and behavioral ecology," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 25(3), pages 435-442.
    3. Logan Grosenick & Tricia S. Clement & Russell D. Fernald, 2007. "Erratum: Fish can infer social rank by observation alone," Nature, Nature, vol. 446(7131), pages 102-102, March.
    4. Eric Bonabeau & Guy Theraulaz & Jean-Louis Deneubourg, 1999. "Dominance Orders in Animal Societies: The Self-Organization Hypothesis Revisited," Working Papers 99-01-007, Santa Fe Institute.
    5. David B. McDonald & Daizaburo Shizuka, 2013. "Comparative transitive and temporal orderliness in dominance networks," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 24(2), pages 511-520.
    6. Noa Pinter-Wollman & Elizabeth A. Hobson & Jennifer E. Smith & Andrew J. Edelman & Daizaburo Shizuka & Shermin de Silva & James S. Waters & Steven D. Prager & Takao Sasaki & George Wittemyer & Jennife, 2014. "The dynamics of animal social networks: analytical, conceptual, and theoretical advances," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 25(2), pages 242-255.
    7. Chakrabarti,Bikas K. & Chakraborti,Anirban & Chakravarty,Satya R. & Chatterjee,Arnab, 2013. "Econophysics of Income and Wealth Distributions," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107013445.
    8. Guillermo Paz-y-Miño C & Alan B. Bond & Alan C. Kamil & Russell P. Balda, 2004. "Pinyon jays use transitive inference to predict social dominance," Nature, Nature, vol. 430(7001), pages 778-781, August.
    9. Jacob Mincer, 1958. "Investment in Human Capital and Personal Income Distribution," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 66, pages 281-281.
    10. Logan Grosenick & Tricia S. Clement & Russell D. Fernald, 2007. "Fish can infer social rank by observation alone," Nature, Nature, vol. 445(7126), pages 429-432, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. D. Timothy Bishop & Mark Broom & Richard Southwell, 2020. "Chris Cannings: A Life in Games," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 10(3), pages 591-617, September.
    2. Chase, Ivan D. & Douady, Raphael & Padilla, Dianna K., 2020. "A comparison of wealth inequality in humans and non-humans," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 538(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Greg Jensen & Fabian Muñoz & Yelda Alkan & Vincent P Ferrera & Herbert S Terrace, 2015. "Implicit Value Updating Explains Transitive Inference Performance: The Betasort Model," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(9), pages 1-27, September.
    2. Elizabeth A Hobson & Simon DeDeo, 2015. "Social Feedback and the Emergence of Rank in Animal Society," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(9), pages 1-20, September.
    3. Takashi Hotta & Kentaro Ueno & Yuya Hataji & Hika Kuroshima & Kazuo Fujita & Masanori Kohda, 2020. "Transitive inference in cleaner wrasses (Labroides dimidiatus)," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(8), pages 1-13, August.
    4. Andrea Polonioli, 2013. "Re-assessing the Heuristics debate," Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Springer;Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 12(2), pages 263-271, November.
    5. Gianluca Manzo & Delia Baldassarri, 2015. "Heuristics, Interactions, and Status Hierarchies," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 44(2), pages 329-387, May.
    6. Kristinn Hermannsson & Patrizio Lecca, 2016. "Human Capital in Economic Development: From Labour Productivity to Macroeconomic Impact," Economic Papers, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 35(1), pages 24-36, March.
    7. Chaudhuri, Sarbajit & Ghosh, Arnab & Banerjee, Dibyendu, 2018. "Can public subsidy on education necessarily improve wage inequality?," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 165-177.
    8. Tommaso AGASISTI & Geraint JOHNES & Marco PACCAGNELLA, 2021. "Tasks, occupations and wages in OECD countries," International Labour Review, International Labour Organization, vol. 160(1), pages 85-112, March.
    9. Kaspar W thrich, 2013. "Set Identification of Generalized Linear Predictors in the Presence of Non-Classical Measurement Errors," Diskussionsschriften dp1304, Universitaet Bern, Departement Volkswirtschaft.
    10. Kadreva, Olga, 2016. "The influence of quantity and age of children on working women’ salaries," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 41, pages 62-77.
    11. Rabensteiner, Thomas & Guschanski, Alexander, 2022. "Autonomy and wage divergence: evidence from European survey data," Greenwich Papers in Political Economy 37925, University of Greenwich, Greenwich Political Economy Research Centre.
    12. Jellal, Mohamed, 2014. "Education private and social returns an optimal taxation policy," MPRA Paper 57190, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Jarle Moen, 2005. "Is Mobility of Technical Personnel a Source of R&D Spillovers?," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 23(1), pages 81-114, January.
    14. Claude DIEBOLT & Jamel TRABELSI, 2009. "Human Capital and French Macroeconomic Growth in the Long Run," Economies et Sociétés (Serie 'Histoire Economique Quantitative'), Association Française de Cliométrie (AFC), issue 40, pages 901-917, May.
    15. Kiran Sharma & Subhradeep Das & Anirban Chakraborti, 2017. "Global Income Inequality and Savings: A Data Science Perspective," Papers 1801.00253, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2018.
    16. Damgaard, Mette Trier & Nielsen, Helena Skyt, 2018. "Nudging in education," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 313-342.
    17. Katie Meara & Francesco Pastore & Allan Webster, 2020. "The gender pay gap in the USA: a matching study," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 33(1), pages 271-305, January.
    18. Falch, Ranveig, 2021. "How Do People Trade Off Resources Between Quick and Slow Learners?," Discussion Paper Series in Economics 5/2021, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Economics.
    19. Burhan Can Karahasan & Firat Bilgel, 2018. "Economic Geography, Growth Dynamics and Human Capital Accumulation in Turkey: Evidence from Regional and Micro Data," Working Papers 1233, Economic Research Forum, revised 10 Oct 2018.
    20. Yaron Zelekha & Léo-Paul Dana, 2019. "Social Capital Versus Cultural Capital Determinants of Entrepreneurship: An Empirical Study of the African Continent," Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation in Emerging Economies, Entrepreneurship Development Institute of India, vol. 28(2), pages 250-269, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0158900. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.