Primate Behavior and the Importance of Comparative Studies in Biological Anthropology

Bibliographic Data

ID24314395
AuthorsAaron A Sandel (0000-0003-3060-5310, Department of Anthropology The University of Texas at Austin Austin Texas USA), Jeremiah E Scott (0000-0003-1427-3010, Department of Medical Anatomical Sciences College of Osteopathic Medicine of the Pacific, Western University of Health Sciences Pomona California USA), J M Kamilar (0000-0001-6082-9396, Department of Anthropology and Graduate Program in Organismic and Evolutionary Biology University of Massachusetts Amherst Amherst Massachusetts USA)
Year2024
Volume186
IssueS78
Publication date2024-12-01
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueAmerican Journal of Biological Anthropology (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 2692-7691 • E-ISSN: 2692-7691
PublisherWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1002/ajpa.70009
LanguageEN
Citations received2
References cited341

ABSTRACT Biological anthropology seeks to understand humans from an evolutionary perspective. Namely, what makes humans different from other animals, and how did we get this way? Many relevant traits are physical, but many others are behavioral. For example, when and why did our species develop complex cognition, enduring bonds, and intense cooperation? Given the importance of behavior, biological anthropologists have a long history of turning to our primate relatives to generate hypotheses about the evolutionary processes shaping humans. Indeed, primate behavior is foundational to our field. But not all biological anthropologists appreciate the value of primate behavior for understanding human evolution. Beyond lip service in introductory paragraphs and grant proposals, many primatologists do not make explicit how their work is relevant to human evolution. In this review, we have three main goals: (1) emphasize how comparative studies of primate behavior are crucial to biological anthropology; (2) outline how primatologists and biological anthropologists can improve their work by avoiding common problems that arise when making such comparisons; and (3) provide a primer on the concepts and methods underlying comparative analyses of traits. We provide examples to highlight these points related to cognition, sociality, and diet. We conclude with several recommendations including (1) detailed, high‐quality studies of behavior that allow for appropriate comparisons within and across species; (2) using primates as a “gateway clade” and expanding our research to any relevant taxa; and (3) careful attention to the ethical implications of making comparisons to other primates given racist tropes and a history of eugenics.