Kia Radovanović, Anoek Lorskens, Sebastian Schütte, Juliane Bräuer, Josep Call, Daniel B M Haun, Edwin J C van Leeuwen
{"title":"Bonobos respond aversively to unequal reward distributions.","authors":"Kia Radovanović, Anoek Lorskens, Sebastian Schütte, Juliane Bräuer, Josep Call, Daniel B M Haun, Edwin J C van Leeuwen","doi":"10.1098/rspb.2024.2873","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Inequity aversion (IA) is the resistance to unequitable rewards given similar investments. It has been postulated as an important mechanism by which human cooperation thrives. To understand the evolutionary origin of human IA and its distribution across the animal kingdom, many species have been tested on IA, with mixed results. Whereas chimpanzees were originally found to show IA, more recent studies showed that their IA response could be explained by social disappointment. We conducted two studies on IA in bonobos using established paradigms: a token-exchange task and the social disappointment task. Bonobos could exchange tokens for equal or less-preferred food rewards than their partners (Study 1) and were tested with humans and machines to control for social disappointment effects (Study 2). We found that bonobos responded aversively to unequal food distributions in both studies, which was reflected by more refusals to participate when disadvantaged. Notably, and contrary to chimpanzees, this effect could not be explained by social disappointment, although Study 2 was only partially consistent with an IA explanation. Overall, our findings indicate that bonobos possess the sensitivity to recognize and respond to unfair treatment, which supports the notion that IA may have coevolved as a stabilizing mechanism for cooperation.</p>","PeriodicalId":20589,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences","volume":"292 2045","pages":"20242873"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12001075/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2024.2873","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/16 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Inequity aversion (IA) is the resistance to unequitable rewards given similar investments. It has been postulated as an important mechanism by which human cooperation thrives. To understand the evolutionary origin of human IA and its distribution across the animal kingdom, many species have been tested on IA, with mixed results. Whereas chimpanzees were originally found to show IA, more recent studies showed that their IA response could be explained by social disappointment. We conducted two studies on IA in bonobos using established paradigms: a token-exchange task and the social disappointment task. Bonobos could exchange tokens for equal or less-preferred food rewards than their partners (Study 1) and were tested with humans and machines to control for social disappointment effects (Study 2). We found that bonobos responded aversively to unequal food distributions in both studies, which was reflected by more refusals to participate when disadvantaged. Notably, and contrary to chimpanzees, this effect could not be explained by social disappointment, although Study 2 was only partially consistent with an IA explanation. Overall, our findings indicate that bonobos possess the sensitivity to recognize and respond to unfair treatment, which supports the notion that IA may have coevolved as a stabilizing mechanism for cooperation.
期刊介绍:
Proceedings B is the Royal Society’s flagship biological research journal, accepting original articles and reviews of outstanding scientific importance and broad general interest. The main criteria for acceptance are that a study is novel, and has general significance to biologists. Articles published cover a wide range of areas within the biological sciences, many have relevance to organisms and the environments in which they live. The scope includes, but is not limited to, ecology, evolution, behavior, health and disease epidemiology, neuroscience and cognition, behavioral genetics, development, biomechanics, paleontology, comparative biology, molecular ecology and evolution, and global change biology.