de Waal F B
Q Rev Biol. 1986 Dec;61(4):459-79. doi: 10.1086/415144.
Social dominance is usually viewed from the perspective of intragroup competition over access to limited resources. The present paper, while not denying the importance of such competition, discusses the dominance concept among monkeys and apes in the context of affiliative bonding, social tolerance, and the reconciliation of aggressive conflicts. Two basic proximate mechanisms are supposed to provide a link between dominance and interindividual affiliation, namely, formalization of the dominance relationship (i.e., unequivocal communication of status), and conditional reassurance (i.e., the linkage of friendly coexistence to formalization of the relationship). Ritualized submission is imposed upon losers of dominance struggles by winners; losers are offered a "choice" between continued hostility or a tolerant relationship with a clearly signalled difference in status. If these two social mechanisms are lacking, aggression is bound to have dispersive effects. In their presence, aggression becomes a well-integrated, even constructive component of social life. In some higher primates this process of integration has reached the stage where status differences are strongly attenuated. In these species, sharing and trading can take the place of overt competition. The views underlying this "reconciled hierarchy" model are only partly new, as is evident from a review of the ethological literature. Many points are illustrated with data on a large semi-captive colony of chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes), particularly data related to striving for status, reconciliation behavior, and general association patterns. These observations demonstrate that relationships among adult male chimpanzees cannot be described in terms of a dichotomy between affiliative and antagonistic tendencies. Male bonding in this species has not been achieved by an elimination of aggression, but by a set of powerful buffering mechanisms that mitigate its effects. Although female chimpanzees do exhibit a potential for bonding under noncompetitive conditions, they appear to lack the buffering mechanisms of the males.
社会支配通常是从群体内部对有限资源获取的竞争角度来审视的。本文虽不否认这种竞争的重要性，但在亲和关系、社会容忍以及攻击冲突的和解背景下探讨猴子和猿类中的支配概念。两种基本的近因机制被认为在支配与个体间亲和关系之间起到联系作用，即支配关系的形式化（即地位的明确传达）以及有条件的安抚（即友好共处与关系形式化之间的联系）。仪式化的屈服由支配斗争的胜者强加给败者；败者在持续敌对或与明确显示地位差异的容忍关系之间面临“选择”。如果缺乏这两种社会机制，攻击必然会产生分散性影响。而在它们存在的情况下，攻击成为社会生活中一个整合良好甚至具有建设性的组成部分。在一些高等灵长类动物中，这种整合过程已达到地位差异大幅减弱的阶段。在这些物种中，分享和交换可以取代公开竞争。从动物行为学文献综述中可以明显看出，这种“和解等级制度”模型背后的观点并非全新。许多观点通过一个大型半圈养黑猩猩群体（黑猩猩）的数据得以说明，特别是与地位争夺、和解行为以及一般关联模式相关的数据。这些观察结果表明，成年雄性黑猩猩之间的关系不能用亲和倾向与敌对倾向的二分法来描述。该物种中的雄性联结并非通过消除攻击来实现，而是通过一套强大的缓冲机制来减轻其影响。尽管雌性黑猩猩在非竞争条件下确实表现出联结的潜力，但它们似乎缺乏雄性的缓冲机制。
