dc.description.abstract | Cognitive abilities vary widely across the animal kingdom, and multiple hypotheses have been formulated to explain why. The Relationship Intelligence Hypothesis (RIH) posits that maintaining and managing high quality pair-bonds is a key driver of cognitive evolution. The RIH was first proposed more than a decade ago, and while its introductory paper has been widely cited, little work has been done to interrogate the RIH’s central predictions. In this thesis, I critically evaluate the RIH. First, in Chapters 2 – 4, I test central predictions of the RIH within one wild study system, the jackdaw (Corvus monedula). Specifically, I test whether (i) pairs have fully aligned fitness interests (Chapter 2); (ii) pairs use consolation as a mechanism through which to manage and maintain their bond (Chapter 3); (iii) pair-bond strength (1) varies between pairs, (2) is consistent within pairs, (3) positively correlates with socio-cognitive performance, and (4) positively correlates with reproductive success (Chapter 4). Finally, I test whether a commonly used method in the study of cognitive evolution - the comparative study of brain size – is methodologically robust (Chapter 5). I find that jackdaw partners do not always have fully aligned fitness interests, and that they do not use consolation to manage and maintain their pair-bond. However, pair-bond strength does vary between pairs, is consistent within pairs and is positively correlated with a measure of socio-cognitive performance, partner responsiveness. While I did not find a link between pair-bond strength and reproductive success, partners with stronger bonds were better able to adjust hatching synchrony to environmental conditions. Finally, I demonstrate that comparative studies of brain size are not methodologically robust. In Chapter 6, I integrate my findings with contemporary empirical and theoretical evidence in order to critically evaluate the RIH. I end by proposing future directions for the study of cognitive evolution. | en_GB |