 | Schweinfurth, M. K. 2021. Anybody watching? How others affect helpful actions. Learn Behav 49: 5–6. |
| Schweinfurth, M. K. 2021. Cooperative intentions and their implications on reciprocal cooperation in Norway rats. Ethology 127: 865–871. |
| Schweinfurth, M. K., Aeschbacher, J., Santi, M., Taborsky, M. 2019. Male Norway rats cooperate according to direct but not generalized reciprocity rules. Animal Behaviour 152: 93–101. |
| Schweinfurth, M. K., Baldridge, D. B., Finnerty, K., Call, J., Knoblich, G. K. 2024. Inter-individual coordination in walking chimpanzees. Current Biology 34: 4338. |
| Schweinfurth, M. K., Call, J. 2019. Reciprocity: Different behavioural strategies, cognitive mechanisms and psychological processes. Learn Behav 47: 284–301. |
| Schweinfurth, M. K., Neuenschwander, J., Engqvist, L., Schneeberger, K., Rentsch, A. K., Gygax, M., Taborsky, M. 2017. Do female Norway rats form social bonds?. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 71: 98. |
| Schweinfurth, M. K., Stieger, B., Taborsky, M. 2017. Experimental evidence for reciprocity in allogrooming among wild-type Norway rats. Scientific Reports 7: 4010. |
| Schweinfurth, M. K., Taborsky, M. 2016. No evidence for audience effects in reciprocal cooperation of norway rats. Ethology 122: 513–521. |
| Schweinfurth, M. K., Taborsky, M. 2017. The transfer of alternative tasks in reciprocal cooperation. Animal Behaviour 131: 35–41. |
| Schweinfurth, M. K., Taborsky, M. 2018. Reciprocal trading of different commodities in norway rats. Current Biology 28: 594–599.e3. |
| Schweinfurth, M. K., Taborsky, M. 2020. Rats play tit-for-tat instead of integrating social experience over multiple interactions. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 287: 20192423. |
 | Schweitzer, C., Houdelier, C., Lumineau, S., Lévy, F., Arnould, C. 2010. Social motivation does not go hand in hand with social bonding between two familiar Japanese quail chicks, Coturnix japonica. Animal Behaviour 79: 571–578. |
| Schweitzer, C., Lévy, F., Arnould, C. 2011. Increasing group size decreases social bonding in young Japanese quail, Coturnix japonica. Animal Behaviour 81: 535–542. |
| Schwing, R., Jocteur, E., Wein, A., Noë, R., Massen, J. J. M. 2016. Kea cooperate better with sharing affiliates. Animal Cognition 19: 1093–1102. |
| Schwing, R., Meaux, E., Piseddu, A., Huber, L., Noë, R. 2021. Kea, Nestor notabilis, achieve cooperation in dyads, triads, and tetrads when dominants show restraint. Learn Behav 49: 36–53. |
| Schwing, R., Nelson, X. J., Wein, A., Parsons, S. 2017. Positive emotional contagion in a New Zealand parrot. Current Biology 27: R213–R214. |
| Schwing, R., Reuillon, L., Conrad, M., Noë, R., Huber, L. 2020. Paying attention pays off: Kea improve in loose-string cooperation by attending to partner. Ethology 126: 246–256. |
| Schwob, N. 2026. Bonobos know when you don’t: Ape ignorance attribution. Learn Behav 54: 5–6. |
| Sclafani, V., Del Rosso, L. A., Seil, S. K., Calonder, L. A., Madrid, J. E., Bone, K. J., Sherr, E. H., Garner, J. P., Capitanio, J. P., Parker, K. J. 2016. Early predictors of impaired social functioning in male rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta). PLoS One 11: e0165401. |
| Scopa, C., Palagi, E., Sighieri, C., Baragli, P. 2018. Physiological outcomes of calming behaviors support the resilience hypothesis in horses. Scientific Reports 8: 17501. |
<<First < Previous 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 Next > Last >>