scholarly journals Chimpanzees, bonobos and children successfully coordinate in conflict situations

2017 ◽  
Vol 284 (1856) ◽  
pp. 20170259 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alejandro Sánchez-Amaro ◽  
Shona Duguid ◽  
Josep Call ◽  
Michael Tomasello
Keyword(s):  
Group Living ◽  
Strategic Decision ◽  
Strategic Decision Making ◽  
Unequal Distribution ◽  
Strategic Behaviour ◽  
Snowdrift Game ◽  
Conflict Situations ◽  
Social Animals ◽  
Pull Strategy ◽  
Set Up

Social animals need to coordinate with others to reap the benefits of group-living even when individuals' interests are misaligned. We compare how chimpanzees, bonobos and children coordinate their actions with a conspecific in a Snowdrift game, which provides a model for understanding how organisms coordinate and make decisions under conflict. In study 1, we presented pairs of chimpanzees, bonobos and children with an unequal reward distribution. In the critical condition, the preferred reward could only be obtained by waiting for the partner to act, with the risk that if no one acted, both would lose the rewards. Apes and children successfully coordinated to obtain the rewards. Children used a ‘both-partner-pull’ strategy and communicated during the task, while some apes relied on an ‘only-one-partner-pulls' strategy to solve the task, although there were also signs of strategic behaviour as they waited for their partner to pull when that strategy led to the preferred reward. In study 2, we presented pairs of chimpanzees and bonobos with the same set-up as in study 1 with the addition of a non-social option that provided them with a secure reward. In this situation, apes had to actively decide between the unequal distribution and the alternative. In this set-up, apes maximized their rewards by taking their partners' potential actions into account. In conclusion, children and apes showed clear instances of strategic decision-making to maximize their own rewards while maintaining successful coordination.

AN APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY OF ENVIRONMENTAL RISK ASSESSMENT FOR STRATEGIC DECISION-MAKING

2014 ◽  
Vol 16 (03) ◽  
pp. 1450013 ◽  
Author(s):  
KAN-KAN WU ◽  
LUO-PING ZHANG ◽  
QIN-HUA FANG
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Environmental Risk ◽  
Environmental Risk Assessment ◽  
Strategic Decision ◽  
Strategic Decision Making ◽  
Systematic Research ◽  
Xiamen Bay ◽  
Analytical Instruments ◽  
Set Up

Environmental Risk Assessment (ERA) is a powerful set of technical and analytical instruments for analyzing environmental impacts, and has found application in supporting Decision-Making Processes (DMPs) over the last two decades. However, there is no interrelated application of ERA in Strategic Decision-Making (SDM) processes, and no systematic research on the approaches and methods of ERA to support the processes of SDM. In this paper, a new approach and methodological system of ERA for SDM process is set up, and then applied to the Principal Coastal Functional Zoning (PCFZ) in Xiamen Bay, China, as a case study to verify the feasibility of the proposed approach and its methodology. The results show that the approach and methodology of ERA for SDM could integrate ERA into the entire SDM process, and thereby support the PCFZ directly. Furthermore, this approach avoids or mitigates against dire environmental risk that are sometimes introduced by the SDM processes.

scholarly journals Strategic decision-making by chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes), bonobos (Pan paniscus) and children in a Snowdrift-Game task

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alejandro Sanchez-Amaro ◽  
Shona Duguid ◽  
Josep Call ◽  
Michael Tomasello
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Pan Paniscus ◽  
Conflicts Of Interest ◽  
Strategic Decision ◽  
Coordination Failure ◽  
Snowdrift Game ◽  
Resource Distributions ◽  
Conflict Situations ◽  
Evolutionary Context ◽  
The Cost

Chimpanzees must be able to coordinate with others even when conflicts of interest are present. The “Snowdrift-Game” provides a model to understand how organisms coordinate and make decisions under conflict situations. By investigating whether and how chimpanzees solve this dilemma we can gain insight into the mechanisms of cooperation. Moreover, by comparing chimpanzees with their closest relatives, bonobos and humans, we can understand the evolutionary context of decision making in this situation. We presented pairs of captive chimpanzees (N=10; Mage= 20.5 years) and bonobos (N=6, Mage=13.7 years) housed at the Leipzig Zoo in Germany as well as 20 children dyads from the same city, with an adapted version of the Snowdrift games. In our task, subjects were faced with an unequal reward distribution. In the critical condition the higher reward was acquired by letting a partner act, with the risk that if neither partner acted the rewards would be lost after a period of thirty seconds. Both chimpanzees and children were highly successful at coordinating their actions to solve the dilemma (bonobo data is currently under collection). They almost never lost the rewards because at least one partner was willing to pay the cost of getting the decreased reward, to avoid coordination failure (no reward). Both species behaved strategically as they waited longer for their partner to act when this would lead to a higher reward. However, evidence from their resource distributions, their action latencies and their communicative acts suggests that children behaved more strategic than chimpanzees. Our results demonstrate that both species can successfully coordinate their actions in conflict situations although they differ in the way they achieve coordination.

scholarly journals Strategic decision-making by chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes), bonobos (Pan paniscus) and children in a Snowdrift-Game task

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alejandro Sanchez-Amaro ◽  
Shona Duguid ◽  
Josep Call ◽  
Michael Tomasello
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Pan Paniscus ◽  
Conflicts Of Interest ◽  
Strategic Decision ◽  
Coordination Failure ◽  
Snowdrift Game ◽  
Resource Distributions ◽  
Conflict Situations ◽  
Evolutionary Context ◽  
The Cost

Chimpanzees must be able to coordinate with others even when conflicts of interest are present. The “Snowdrift-Game” provides a model to understand how organisms coordinate and make decisions under conflict situations. By investigating whether and how chimpanzees solve this dilemma we can gain insight into the mechanisms of cooperation. Moreover, by comparing chimpanzees with their closest relatives, bonobos and humans, we can understand the evolutionary context of decision making in this situation. We presented pairs of captive chimpanzees (N=10; Mage= 20.5 years) and bonobos (N=6, Mage=13.7 years) housed at the Leipzig Zoo in Germany as well as 20 children dyads from the same city, with an adapted version of the Snowdrift games. In our task, subjects were faced with an unequal reward distribution. In the critical condition the higher reward was acquired by letting a partner act, with the risk that if neither partner acted the rewards would be lost after a period of thirty seconds. Both chimpanzees and children were highly successful at coordinating their actions to solve the dilemma (bonobo data is currently under collection). They almost never lost the rewards because at least one partner was willing to pay the cost of getting the decreased reward, to avoid coordination failure (no reward). Both species behaved strategically as they waited longer for their partner to act when this would lead to a higher reward. However, evidence from their resource distributions, their action latencies and their communicative acts suggests that children behaved more strategic than chimpanzees. Our results demonstrate that both species can successfully coordinate their actions in conflict situations although they differ in the way they achieve coordination.

scholarly journals HR Managers’ Emotions in Strategic Decision-Making Events: Evidence from Croatia

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 845
Author(s):  
Marli Gonan Božac ◽  
Katarina Kostelić
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Problem Solving ◽  
Strategic Planning ◽  
Strategic Decision ◽  
Strategic Decision Making ◽  
Personal Perspective ◽  
Human Resource Managers ◽  
Organizational Perspective ◽  
Hr Managers ◽  
Experienced Emotion

The inclusion of emotions in the strategic decision-making research is long overdue. This paper deals with the emotions that human resource managers experience when they participate in a strategic problem-solving event or a strategic planning event. We examine the patterns in the intensity of experienced emotions with regard to event appraisal (from a personal perspective and the organization’s perspective), job satisfaction, and coexistence of emotions. The results reveal that enthusiasm is the most intensely experienced emotion for positively appraised strategic decision-making events, while frustration is the most intensely experienced emotion for negatively appraised problem-solving events, as is disappointment for strategic planning. The distinction between a personal and organizational perspective of the event appraisal reveals differences in experienced emotions, and the intensity of experienced anger is the best indicator of the difference in the event appraisals from the personal and organizational perspective. Both events reveal the variety of involved emotions and the coexistence of—not just various emotions, but also emotions of different dominant valence. The findings indicate that a strategic problem-solving event triggers greater emotional turmoil than a strategic planning event. The paper also discusses theoretical and practical implications.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document