Chimps of a feather sit together: chimpanzee friendships are based on homophily in personality
Jorg J M Massen and Sonja E Koski
Available online 2 October 2013
Evolution and Human Behavior
Abstract
Several recent studies show that animal friendships, like human friendships, are durable and have fitness benefits by increasing survival, infant survival, or reproductive success. However, the determinants of especially non-kin friendships are unclear. Human non-kin friendships are partly determined by similarity in personality. We investigated personality similarity of friends in 38 captive chimpanzees. Within-subject comparisons revealed that friends are more similar than non-friends in their Sociability and Boldness. Subsequent analyses, including both kin- and non-kin dyads, revealed higher similarity in Sociability among all individuals who sat in contact more often, while in Boldness and Grooming Equity the positive effect of similarity was only found in non-kin individuals’ contact-sitting. Our results show that similar to humans, chimpanzees’ friendships are related to homophily in certain personality characteristics, particularly those relevant for socio-positive and cooperative behaviour. We suggest that having friends similar to self in personality decreases uncertainty in interactions by promoting reliability especially in cooperative contexts, and is consequently adaptive. Further, we suggest that homophily in human friendships dates back at least to our last common ancestor with chimpanzees.
Posts mit dem Label Homophily werden angezeigt. Alle Posts anzeigen
Posts mit dem Label Homophily werden angezeigt. Alle Posts anzeigen
Montag, 7. Oktober 2013
Samstag, 31. August 2013
Birds of a Feather: Homophily in Social Networks
Birds of a Feather: Homophily in Social Networks
Miller Mc Pherson et al.; 2001
Abstract
Similarity breeds connection. This principle - the homophily principle - structures network ties of every type, including marriage, friendship, work, advice, support, information transfer, exchange, comembership, and other types of relationship. The result is that people’s personal networks are homogeneous with regard to many sociodemographic, behavioral, and intrapersonal characteristics. Homophily limits people’s social worlds in a way that has powerful implications for the information they receive, the attitudes they form, and the interactions they experience. Homophily in race and ethnicity creates the strongest divides in our personal environments, with age, religion, education, occupation, and gender following in roughly that order. Geographic propinquity, families, organizations, and isomorphic positions in social systems all create contexts in which homophilous relations form. Ties between nonsimilar individuals also dissolve at a higher rate, which sets the stage for the formation of niches (localized positions) within social space. We argue for more research on: (a) the basic ecological processes that link organizations, associations, cultural communities, social movements, and many other social forms; (b) the impact of multiplex ties on the patterns of homophily; and (c) the dynamics of network change over time through which networks and other social entities co-evolve.
Miller Mc Pherson et al.; 2001
Abstract
Similarity breeds connection. This principle - the homophily principle - structures network ties of every type, including marriage, friendship, work, advice, support, information transfer, exchange, comembership, and other types of relationship. The result is that people’s personal networks are homogeneous with regard to many sociodemographic, behavioral, and intrapersonal characteristics. Homophily limits people’s social worlds in a way that has powerful implications for the information they receive, the attitudes they form, and the interactions they experience. Homophily in race and ethnicity creates the strongest divides in our personal environments, with age, religion, education, occupation, and gender following in roughly that order. Geographic propinquity, families, organizations, and isomorphic positions in social systems all create contexts in which homophilous relations form. Ties between nonsimilar individuals also dissolve at a higher rate, which sets the stage for the formation of niches (localized positions) within social space. We argue for more research on: (a) the basic ecological processes that link organizations, associations, cultural communities, social movements, and many other social forms; (b) the impact of multiplex ties on the patterns of homophily; and (c) the dynamics of network change over time through which networks and other social entities co-evolve.
Sonntag, 4. August 2013
Do Birds of a Feather Flock Together?
Do Birds of a Feather Flock Together?
Oliver Curry, Robin Dunbar; September 2013
Human Nature
Abstract
Cooperation requires that individuals are able to identify, and preferentially associate with, others who have compatible preferences and the shared background knowledge needed to solve interpersonal coordination problems. The present study investigates the nature of such similarity within social networks, asking: What do friends have in common? And what is the relationship between similarity and altruism? The results show that similarity declines with frequency of contact; similarity in general is a significant predictor of altruism and emotional closeness; and, specifically, sharing a sense of humor, hobbies and interests, moral beliefs, and being from the same area are the best predictors. These results shed light on the structure of relationships within networks and provide a possible checklist for predicting attitudes toward strangers, and in-group identification.
Oliver Curry, Robin Dunbar; September 2013
Human Nature
Abstract
Cooperation requires that individuals are able to identify, and preferentially associate with, others who have compatible preferences and the shared background knowledge needed to solve interpersonal coordination problems. The present study investigates the nature of such similarity within social networks, asking: What do friends have in common? And what is the relationship between similarity and altruism? The results show that similarity declines with frequency of contact; similarity in general is a significant predictor of altruism and emotional closeness; and, specifically, sharing a sense of humor, hobbies and interests, moral beliefs, and being from the same area are the best predictors. These results shed light on the structure of relationships within networks and provide a possible checklist for predicting attitudes toward strangers, and in-group identification.
Abonnieren
Posts (Atom)