Comparison of Humans and Primates

Cooperation in Primates Given their massive amount of intelligence compared to other non-human animals and just how close they are to human in many ways, primates are often a major point of study when it comes to habits, trends and behaviors. One such behavior as identified by scientists in both humans and primates would be cooperation. Indeed, primates often cooperate and work together just like humans and this has been a specific point of study by many scientific personnel in general and primate specialists (e.g. zoologists, etc.) in particular.

While there are some markedly different levels of cooperation between humans and primates, there are also some major similarities as well. Cooperation tends to be present in many species, both advanced and less advanced, as they are pro-social in nature and they tend to benefit and help the broader collective. These pro-social acts can be reactive in many cases. This would be in response to a specific set of stimuli most of the time. There can also be proactive causes and iterations of cooperation.

These occur in the absence of specific stimuli. Generally speaking, reactive and pro-social acts are signals or signs of need, are based on the presence of size of an audience or are modified by the social distance to the partner or partners. Just one example of cooperation is food sharing. It has been noted by many that both cooperative and even altruistic behavior is often favored by natural selection if there is an increase in the inclusive fitness of the acting animal.

The manifestations and details of such a situation are becoming more well-known by the day. Another factor is reciprocity. Indeed, an animal will tend to be more apt to cooperate if there is a symbiotic benefit involved in being part of the cooperation (Jaeggi, Burkart and Van Schaik 2010). In many regards, these cooperative behaviors seem to be formed and shaped by a set of unwritten rules that are followed and adhered to, at least some of the time, by the primates or other animals in question.

There can be both intrinsic and extrinsic manifestations and examples of this in motion. Of course, cooperation and other working together is quite pervasive and common with humans. However, looking at primate and apes in general, one can see that it is much less common. For example, food sharing does sometime happen with primates and apes but it is usually reluctant and not something that is actively done. This would even include situations where the ape is with its immediate kin.

Among chimpanzees, there is very strong mutual support among bonded males and this often manifests in the form of when there are conflicts. If one of the bonded males gets into a conflict with another chimpanzee, the other bonded male will usually come to the aid of his partner (Jaeggi, Burkart and Van Schaik 2010; Jack, 2014). Generally speaking, apes are the one group that show a lot of "parallels" and commonalities with humans.

Examples would include voluntary food sharing, teaching, allo-maternal care and care for other apes that are injured or are otherwise in distress. Similarly, there are a lot of cooperative breeders among callitriche monkeys and social carnivores (Anzenberger & Falk, 2012). This is an indication that cooperative breeders enjoy higher return on "investment." In other words, they give help and they get a good return on that help in the form of help in return.

Humans are also cooperative breeders so this is just one way that humans and primates tend to be alike in at least a general sense (Yamamoto et al., 2014). However, there is a strong divergence between humans and chimpanzees when it comes to cooperation. In humans, there is a high and strong level of interdependence when it comes to foragers. This happens because the returns from going out alone is typically much less than if they remain in a group and work together.

In other words, the humans realize that there is strength in numbers and they all mutually benefit more if they work as a team. As such, they've learned and adapted in such a way to take full advantage of this fact. A human on its own is going to be in much worse shape than a chimpanzee in the same situation. There are always exceptions but that is indeed the general rule (Jaeggi, Burkart and Van Schaik 2010).

The same can be said for the cooperation and motor coordination that has been observed with macaque monkeys (Visco-Comandini et al., 2015). In general, the response severity and manifestation in primates depends on the natural selection process that led to a primate being what it is in terms of psyche, its logic system and so forth. While there are tendencies and patterns that will reveal themselves due to these pre-written pathways, there are situations where the primates will change and adapt based on the situation at hand.

For example, if a primate perceives a higher level of need (e.g. for food, etc.), they are much more likely to break away from their usual patterns and engage in cooperation (De Waal, 2006). In short, a chimpanzee will tend to behave the way it wishes but it is not immune or ignorant to using its self-interest to regulate what it does, why it does it and so forth. At the same time, the primates that do this are not blind to who they are working with.

A primate will be much more likely to react in general and give a fuller amount of cooperation if the other primate in question is close to them including bonded mates, kin and so forth. They do this because they know the reciprocal benefit to them will tend to be much greater and much more consistent than if the other primate in question is a stranger (Jaeggi, Burkart and Van Schaik 2010). Conclusion Primates are indeed much more behind the curve than humans when it comes to cooperation.

However, they are also much more.