International Journal of Primatology

, Volume 32, Issue 6, pp 1433–1442 | Cite as

All Together Now: The Need for a Combined Empirical and Modeling Approach When Studying Primate Group Coordination



Studies of collective decision making attempt to explain the simultaneous behaviors of many individuals and how these contribute to the behavior observed at a collective level. However, this can be problematic to achieve given the general constraints of field or experimental data. This is particularly the case for primates, and results in limited reproducibility of events and it is difficult to separate the effects of different variables. Advocates of theoretical models have proposed that simple rules of interaction successfully reproduce different phases of group movement and the transitions between them, and greatly contribute to our knowledge of complex phenomena. Models can simulate practically any situation and tell us what response would emerge from it, including complex situations such as group decision making. The general heuristic value of these models has been universally recognized. However, the modeling approach tends to oversimplify real situations, and very few biological validations yet exist. I here suggest that it is essential to confront theoretical results with real data and that the combination of the 2 approaches will substantially improve our comprehension of collective decision making.


Collective movement Field data Giving up Group decision making Models 



I thank the 3 anonymous reviewers and Andrew King and Joanna Setchell for their constructive comments for improving the manuscript. I also thank Cédric Sueur and Andrew King for the invitation to publish in this special issue.


  1. Ballerini, M., Cabibbo, N., Candelier, R., Cavagna, A., Cisbani, E., Giardina, I., et al. (2008). Interaction ruling animal collective behavior depends on topological rather than metric distance: evidence from a field study. PNAS, 105, 1232–1237.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Berger, J. (1977). Organizational system and dominance in feral horses in the grand canyon. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 2, 131–136.Google Scholar
  3. Boinski, S. (1993). Vocal coordination of group movement among white-faced capuchin monkeys, Cebus capucinus. American Journal of Primatology, 30, 85–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bumann, D., Krause, J., & Rubenstein, D. I. (1997). Mortality risk of spatial positions in animal groups: the danger of being in the front. Behaviour, 134, 1063–1076.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Byrne, R. W., Whiten, A., & Henzi, S. P. (1990). Social relationships of mountain baboons: leadership and affiliation in a non-female-bonded monkey. American Journal of Primatology, 20, 313–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Camazine, S., Deneubourg, J. L., Franks, N. R., Sneyd, J., Theraulaz, G., & Bonabeau, E. (2001). Self-organization in biological systems. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Couzin, I. D., Krause, J., Franks, N. R., & Levin, S. A. (2005). Effective leadership and decision-making in animal groups on the move. Nature, 433, 513–516.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Deneubourg, J. L., & Goss, S. (1989). Collective patterns and decision making. Ethology Ecology Evolution, 1, 295–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dussutour, A., Fourcassié, V., Helbing, D., & Deneubourg, J.-L. (2004). Optimal traffic organization in ants under crowded condition. Nature, 428, 70–73.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Grimm, V. (1999). Ten years of individual-based modelling in ecology: what have we learned and what could we learn in the future? Ecological Modelling, 115, 129–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hemelrijk, C. K. (1999). An individual-oriented model on the emergence of despotic and egalitarian societies. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 266, 361–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Holekamp, K. E., Boydston, E. E., & Smale, L. (2000). Group travel in social carnivores. In S. Boinski & P. A. Garber (Eds.), On the move (pp. 587–627). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  13. Jacobs, A., Sueur, C., Deneubourg, J.-L., & Petit, O. (2011). Social network influences decision making during collective movements in brown lemurs. International Journal of Primatology. doi: 10.1007/s10764-011-9497-8.
  14. Katsikopoulos, K. V., & King, A. J. (2010). Swarm intelligence in animal groups: when can a collective out-perform an expert? PLoS One, 5(11), e15505. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0015505.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. King, A. J., & Cowlishaw, G. (2007). When to use social information: the advantages of large group size in individual decision-making. Biology Letters, 3, 137–139.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. King, A. J., & Cowlishaw, G. (2009). Leaders, followers and group-decision-making. Integrative and Communicative Biology, 2, 147–150.Google Scholar
  17. Leca, J.-B., Gunst, N., Thierry, B., & Petit, O. (2003). Distributed leadership in semifree-ranging white-faced capuchin monkeys. Animal Behaviour, 66, 1045–1052.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Mailleux, A. C., Devigne, C., Deneubourg, J.-L., & Detrain, C. (2010). Impact of starvation on Lasius niger's exploration. Ethology, 116, 248–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Menzel, C. R., & Beck, B. B. (2000). Homing and detour in golden lion tamarin social groups. In S. Boinski & P. A. Garber (Eds.), On the move (pp. 299–326). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  20. Nagy, M., Akos, Z., Biro, D., & Viscsek, T. (2010). Hierarchical group dynamics in pigeon flocks. Nature, 464, 890–894.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Petit, O., Gautrais, J., Leca, J. B., Theraulaz, G., & Deneubourg, J. L. (2009). Collective decision-making in white-faced capuchin monkeys. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 276, 3495–3503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Pillot, M. H., Gautrais, J., Gouello, J., Michelena, P., Sibbald, A., & Bon, R. (2010). Moving together: incidental leaders and naive followers. Behavioural Processes, 83, 235–241.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Puga-Gonzalez, I., Hildenbrandt, H., & Hemelrijk, C. K. (2009). Emergent patterns of social affiliation in primates, a model. PLoS Computational Biology, 5, e1000630. doi: 1000610.1001371/journal.pcbi.1000630.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Radford, A. N. (2004). Vocal coordination of group movement by green woodhoopoes Phoeniculus purpureus. Ethology, 110, 11–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ramseyer, A., Petit, O., & Thierry, B. (2009a). Decision-making in group departures of domestic domestic geese. Behaviour, 146, 351–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Ramseyer, A., Boissy, A., Thierry, B., & Dumont, B. (2009b). Individual and social determinants of spontaneous group movements in cattle and sheep. Animal, 39, 1319–1326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Rands, S. A., Cowlishaw, G., Pettifor, R. A., Rowcliffe, J. M., & Johnsone, R. A. (2003). Spontaneous emergence of leaders and followers in foraging pairs. Nature, 423, 432–434.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sueur, C., & Petit, O. (2008a). Organization of group members at departure is driven by social structure in Macaca. International Journal of Primatology, 29, 1085–1098.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Sueur, C., & Petit, O. (2008b). Shared or unshared consensus decision in macaques? Behavioural Processes, 78, 84–92.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Sueur, C., Deneubourg, J.-L., & Petit, O. (2009). Selective mimetism at departure in collective movements of the Tonkean macaque (Macaca tonkeana): a theoretical and experimental approach. Animal Behaviour, 78, 1087–1095.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Sueur, C., Deneubourg, J.-L., Petit, O., & Couzin, I. (2010a). Differences in nutrient requirements imply a non-linear emergence of leaders in animal groups. PLoS Computational Biology, 6(9), e1000917.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Sueur, C., Deneubourg, J.-L., & Petit, O. (2010b). Sequence of quorums during collective decision-making in macaques. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 64, 1885–1895.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Sueur, C., Deneubourg, J. L., & Petit, O. (2010c). From the first intention movement to the last joiner: Macaques combine mimetic rules to optimize their collective decisions. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences. doi:10.1098/rspb.2010.2084
  34. Sumpter, D. J. T. (2006). The principles of collective animal behaviour. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 361, 5–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Université de Strasbourg, IPHCStrasbourgFrance
  2. 2.CNRS, UMR7178StrasbourgFrance
  3. 3.Social Ecology UnitFree University of BrusselsBrusselsBelgium

Personalised recommendations