Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2016 Nov 30;283(1843):20161567.
doi: 10.1098/rspb.2016.1567.

Within-group behavioural consequences of between-group conflict: a prospective review

Affiliations
Review

Within-group behavioural consequences of between-group conflict: a prospective review

Andrew N Radford et al. Proc Biol Sci. .

Abstract

Conflict is rife in group-living species and exerts a powerful selective force. Group members face a variety of threats from extra-group conspecifics, from individuals looking for reproductive opportunities to rival groups seeking resources. Theory predicts that such between-group conflict should influence within-group behaviour. However, compared with the extensive literature on the consequences of within-group conflict, relatively little research has considered the behavioural impacts of between-group conflict. We give an overview of why between-group conflict is expected to influence subsequent behaviour among group members. We then use what is known about the consequences of within-group conflict to generate testable predictions about how between-group conflict might affect within-group behaviour in the aftermath. We consider the types of behaviour that could change and how the role of different group members in the conflict can exert an influence. Furthermore, we discuss how conflict characteristics and outcome, group size, social structure and within-group relationship quality might modulate post-conflict behavioural changes. Finally, we propose the need for consistent definitions, a broader range of examined behaviours and taxa, individual-focused data collection, complementary observational and experimental approaches, and a consideration of lasting effects if we are to understand fully the significant influence of between-group conflict on social behaviour.

Keywords: aggression; behavioural consequences; conflict; group living; social evolution.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Krause J, Ruxton GD. 2000. Living in groups Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
    1. Hardy IC, Briffa M. 2013. Animal contests. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
    1. van Schaik CP. 1989. The ecology of social relationships amongst female primates. In Comparative socioecology: the behavioral ecology of humans and other mammals (eds Standen V, Foley RA), pp. 195–218. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
    1. Conradt L, Roper TJ. 2009. Conflicts of interest and the evolution of decision sharing. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 364, 807–819. (10.1098/rstb.2008.0257) - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Nonacs P, Hager R. 2011. The past, present and future of reproductive skew theory and experiments. Biol. Rev. 86, 271–298. (10.1111/j.1469-185X.2010.00144.x) - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources