Vocal communication in social groups
Vocal communication in social groups
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/978-3-642-02624-9_2
复制
发表时间：
2010-01-01
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Manser, Marta
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Fichtel, Claudia;Manser, Marta
对于许多组织成社会群体的哺乳动物和鸟类来说，声音交流在调节社会互动和协调活动方面发挥着特别重要的作用。先前对声音信号的功能和演化的研究主要考虑信号发送者及其接收者的二元交互。然而，在社会群体中，很可能有更多的人参与双向交流，并且他们利用这些信息来谋取自己的利益，有时会以信号员的利益为代价。为了改进现有的沟通模式，还必须考虑由旁观者引起的声音沟通的收益和成本。在这里，我们讨论社会群体中的声音交流，并确定其他个体对信号交互的影响，重点关注受众效应、窃听和群体协调。首先，对现有文献的回顾表明，观众（即信号范围内的其他个体）的存在明显影响了交流互动的结果，并且个体根据旁观者或各种环境中特定类别旁观者的存在来调节其信号行为。其次，通过窃听群体内的交流网络获得的社会知识不仅影响未来的行为，而且还可以为窃听者提供个人利益，而相互窃听可以构建合作和联盟，从而有助于长期的群体稳定。第三，交流网络还提供了一种促进维持群体凝聚力和决策过程的手段。总之，二元交互层面的成本效益分析揭示了与考虑与多个合作伙伴重复交互的通信网络的明显差异。因此，未来的传播模型和实证研究应考虑整个传播网络的构成以及重复交互的影响，以充分理解社会群体中的信号交互。
Vocal communication plays a particularly important role in the regulation of social interactions and in the coordination of activities in many mammals and birds that are organised into social groups. Previous research on the function and evolution of vocal signals has mainly considered dyadic interactions of a signaller and its addressed receiver. However, in social groups it is likely that additional individuals attend to dyadic communication and that they use this information to their own benefit, sometimes at a cost to the signaller. To improve existing communication models, benefits and costs of vocal communication caused by bystanders must therefore also be considered. Here we discuss vocal communication in social groups and identify the effects of additional individuals on signalling interactions, concentrating on audience effects, eavesdropping and group coordination. First, a review of the existing literature reveals that the presence of an audience, i.e., additional individuals within the signalling range, clearly affects the outcome of communicative interactions, and that individuals modulate their signalling behaviour according to the presence of bystanders or a particular category of bystanders in a variety of contexts. Second, social knowledge acquired by eavesdropping on the communicative network within a group influences not only future actions, but can also provide individual benefits for eavesdroppers, whereas mutual eavesdropping can structure cooperation and alliance formation, and, hence, contribute to long-term group stability. Third, communicative networks also provide a means to facilitate the maintenance of group cohesion and decision-making processes. In conclusion, cost-benefit analyses at the level of dyadic interactions reveal clear differences with communication networks, where repeated interactions with multiple partners are considered. Future communication models and empirical studies should therefore consider the composition of the entire communication network as well as the effects of repeated interactions to fully understand signalling interactions in social groups.