  Members of a social species need to make appropriate decisions about who,
how, and when to interact with others in their group. However, it has been
difficult for researchers to detect the inputs to these decisions and, in
particular, how much information individuals actually have about their social
context. We present a new method that can serve as a social assay to quantify
how patterns of aggression depend upon information about the ranks of
individuals within social dominance hierarchies. Applied to existing data on
aggression in 172 social groups across 85 species in 23 orders, it reveals
three main patterns of rank-dependent social dominance: the downward heuristic
(aggress uniformly against lower-ranked opponents), close competitors (aggress
against opponents ranked slightly below self), and bullying (aggress against
opponents ranked much lower than self). The majority of the groups (133 groups,
77%) follow a downward heuristic, but a significant minority (38 groups, 22%)
show more complex social dominance patterns (close competitors or bullying)
consistent with higher levels of social information use. These patterns are not
phylogenetically constrained and different groups within the same species can
use different patterns, suggesting that heuristics use may depend on context
and the structuring of aggression by social information should not be
considered a fixed characteristic of a species. Our approach provides new
opportunities to study the use of social information within and across species
and the evolution of social complexity and cognition.
