Third-party vocal intervention in the proboscis monkey (Nasalis larvatus)

Vocal intervention is a triadic social interaction, where a third party responds vocally to a conflict between group members, minimizing the costs of aggression in response to the intervention. Because there is little information on vocal third-party intervention in nonhuman mammals, we investigated whether adult male proboscis monkeys use the bray vocalization as a vocal third-party intervention signal to intervene in intragroup conflicts. First, we audio-recorded 1,811 vocalizations from 17 free-ranging proboscis monkey groups in the Lower Kinabatangan Wildlife Sanctuary, analyzing 378 vocal responses of the adult male to agonistic vocal exchanges (shrieks) of group members. Second, we video- and audio-recorded five habituated groups in the Labuk Bay Proboscis Monkey Sanctuary investigating the context of these vocalizations and the conflict dyads evoking vocal support. We found that adult males of one-male/multifemale groups mainly uttered bray vocalizations, whereas females, immatures, and infants uttered shrieks in intragroup conflicts or in response to other animal species. The adult male uttered significantly more often brays after agonistic shrieks than expected based on the overall occurrence of brays. Brays ended 65% of agonistic conflicts, which were accompanied by vocalizations of the conflict partners and occurred more often after conflicts between females than between offspring. This suggests that the bray functions as a vocal third-party intervention signal for intragroup conflict resolution. We suggest that living in the high canopies of the tropical rainforest might restrict direct access to conflict partners and prevent physical intervention, favoring the evolution of the bray as a third-party vocal intervention signal.

Systematic review of topical interventions for the management of odour in patients with chronic wounds or malignant fungating wounds: a study protocol

Background: Chronic wounds including venous, arterial, diabetic and pressure ulcers affect up to 2.21 per 1000 population. Malignant fungating wounds affect up to 6.6% of oncology patients. These wounds impact patients and health care systems significantly. Microbes colonising chronic wounds can produce volatile molecules with unpleasant odours. Wound odour adversely affects quality of life, yet management strategies are inconsistent. Clinicians express uncertainty regarding the current range of odour management agents, which therefore requires evaluation for effectiveness. Objective: To determine the effects of topical agents in the management of odour in patients with chronic and malignant fungating wounds. Methods: Searches of Embase, Medline, CINAHL, Cochrane CENTRAL, PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and the clinicaltrials.gov and WudracT trial registries from inception to present will be conducted without language limits. Randomised controlled trials including adults with venous, arterial, mixed arterio-venous, diabetic, decubitus or malignant fungating wounds, investigating topical agents to manage odour are eligible. Reference lists of included studies and identified systematic reviews will be scanned, and unpublished studies will be sought in the BASE database, in conference proceedings and through contacting authors. Two reviewers will independently scan titles/abstracts and full text articles against predetermined eligibility criteria, with discrepancies resolved by discussion between reviewers or through third-party intervention. Two reviewers will independently extract data from included studies. Disagreements will be resolved by discussion between reviewers or through third-party intervention. Bias risk and evidence quality will be assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2 and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) system. Meta-analysis will be applied where appropriate. Otherwise, data will be synthesised narratively. Discussion: Wound odour management typically takes a trial-and-error approach. Clinicians are critical of odour management agent effectiveness. This review will evaluate the range of available agents to inform practice and research. PROSPERO registration: CRD42021267668 (14/08/2021)

Direct punishment and indirect reputation-based tactics to intervene against offences

Punishment and reputation-based mechanisms play a major role in supporting the evolution of human cooperation. Theoretical accounts and field observations suggest that humans use multiple tactics to intervene against offences—including confrontation, gossip and ostracism—which have unique benefits and costs. Here, we draw a distinction between direct punishment tactics (i.e. physical and verbal confrontation) and indirect reputation-based tactics (i.e. gossip and ostracism). Based on this distinction, we sketch the common and unique social functions that different tactics are tailored to serve and describe information-processing mechanisms that potentially underlie decisions concerning how to intervene against offences. We propose that decision rules guiding direct and indirect tactics should weigh information about the benefits of changing others' behaviour versus the costs of potential retaliation. Based on a synthesis of existing evidence, we highlight the role of situational, relational and emotional factors in motivating distinct punishment tactics. We suggest that delineating between direct and indirect tactics can inform debates about the prevalence and functions of punishment and the reputational consequences of third-party intervention against offences. We emphasize the need to study how people use reputation-based tactics for partner recalibration and partner choice, within interdependent relationships and social networks, and in daily life situations. This article is part of the theme issue ‘The language of cooperation: reputation and honest signalling’.

Direct Punishment and Indirect Reputation-Based Tactics to Intervene Against Offenses

Punishment and reputation-based mechanisms play a major role in supporting the evolution of human cooperation. Theoretical accounts and field observations suggest that humans use multiple tactics to intervene against offenses—including confrontation, gossip, and ostracism—which have unique benefits and costs. Here, we draw a distinction between direct punishment tactics (i.e., physical and verbal confrontation) and indirect reputation-based tactics (i.e., gossip and ostracism). Based on this distinction, we sketch the common and unique social functions that different tactics are tailored to serve and describe information-processing mechanisms that potentially underlie decisions concerning how to intervene against offenses. We propose that decision rules guiding direct and indirect tactics should weigh information about the benefits of changing others’ behavior versus the costs of potential retaliation. Based on a synthesis of existing evidence, we highlight the role of situational, relational, and emotional factors in motivating distinct punishment tactics. We suggest that delineating between direct and indirect tactics can inform debates about the prevalence and functions of punishment, and the reputational consequences of third-party intervention against offenses. We emphasize the need to study how people use reputation-based tactics for partner recalibration and partner choice, within interdependent relationships and social networks, and in daily life situations.

家族信託基礎構造與遺囑信託爭議問題研究──以福祉型信託內涵為核心開展

「福祉型信託」（Welfare Trusts）為家族治理（Family Governance）、家族事業所有權（Family Property Business Ownership）、家族財產事業經營管理（Family Property Business Management）所組成之「家族信託」（Family Trust）核心，具有民事信託與商業信託之雙面性，且非僅僅為單純之財產管理制度，而係「財產管理運用、活用以及傳承」機能之最大程度展現，以完整支援信託利益享有者包括生活及財產管理全盤支援架構建立之身心照護。有鑑於此，本文以我國信託法主要繼受之日本「信託法」法制規範及其相關學理與實務發展為比較法對象，以福祉型信託為核心，對家族信託與遺囑信託進行研究。首先，家族信託制度之建置上，須考量其與消費者權益調和、裁量信託使用界線與合理分配、共益定性、第三人介入之限制、責任信託之搭配。其次，針對永續傳承、連續受益人、特留分、目的信託與特定目的信託、「閉鎖性公司＋自益信託」架構等家族信託爭議問題，提出研究對策。再者，家族信託法制尚未完整建立前，應以前述福祉型信託為核心之家族信託為基礎，對信託行為與方法解釋與修正、受益人權益確保、遺囑信託受託催告、法院選任遺囑信託受託人、遺囑信託委託人之繼承人、替代遺囑信託等議題進行解析，俾使我國遺囑信託功能確實發揮與家族信託內涵相互搭配。最後，從家族信託架構下之委託人與受託人角色與功能，提出本文之結論與建議。<br />&ldquo;Welfare trust&rdquo;is the core of a family trust composed of family governance, family property business ownership, and family property business management. It has duality of civil trust and commercial trust in that it is not only a pure property management system, but also the maximum demonstration of the function of property management application, utilization, and inheritance to support the physical and mental care of the trust beneficiaries which include the establishment of a comprehensive support structure for life and a thorough property management. In the establishment of the family trust system, this article firstly argues that it is necessary to consider the coordination with consumer rights, discretionary trust boundaries and reasonable distribution, common benefits, restrictions on third party intervention, and liability trust. Secondly, this article puts forward the research results on the controversial issues of family trust such as perpetual inheritance, continuous beneficiaries, legally reserved portion, purpose trusts and special purpose trusts, and&ldquo;closed company with self-benefit trust&rdquo;structure. Furthermore, before the establishment of a complete family trust legal structure, it is important to analyze the combination of testamentary trust and family trust, interpretation and amendment of trust behaviors and methods to ensure the rights and interests of the beneficiaries, and the appointment the trustee of the testamentary trust by the court, the successor of the settlor of the testamentary trust, and alternative testamentary trust (trust with successive beneficiaries). Finally, the article provides conclusions and suggestions from the perspective of the settlor and the trustee of trust.<br />