4. HORMONES AND BEHAVIOR
207
of hypophyseal hormones in the regulation of nest building, courtship,
and agonistic behavior of the male stickleback, Gasterosteus aculeatus,
but the identity of the hormones has not been established. The relationship is synergistic and more evident in nest building and courtship than
in the initial development of aggressive behavior.
III. The Recording and Measurement of Behavior
The methods of recording and measuring behavior—reviewed by
Denenberg and Banks (59) for the domestic animals—vary from species
to species. Many factors account for this. The technical problems imposed by the behavior of the species selected for study are usually peculiar to that species; they are never common to all. In most species the
behavior displayed by the two sexes tends to be strongly dimorphic and
requires different methodologies. The development of methods has been
influenced by the background, interests, and goals of the investigator.
In a general way methods have ranged from the relatively simple procedures developed by investigators who have used laboratory mammals
—many references are contained in the review by Young (9)—to the
elaborate schema prepared by the psychologists and ethologists who
have followed the sequences or reaction chains in many fishes, birds,
and insects, e.g., Baerends et al. (60), Barrass (61), Fabricius and Lindroth (62), Gabbutt (63), Hinde (64, 65), Lind (66), Morris (67),
Moynihan and Hall (68), Skard (69), Spieth (70), and Wood-Gush
(71). To be sure, not all the behavior described by these investigators
has been related to hormonal activity, but diagrams of the type they
have prepared are an aid in any analysis that is attempted.
Quite apart from the variations in methods imposed by differences
between species and sexes are those assignable to differences in the
training, technical skill, and purposes of the investigator. Furthermore,
over a period of time the methods employed by individual investigators
have changed, for experience with a species leads inevitably to a finer
discernment of the many elements or measures composing the patterns
characteristic of that species. This is well illustrated in the articles by
Beach, Stone, Young, and their associates written during the period
spanning the 1920's through the 1950's.
In any study of the hormones and behavior, allowance must be made
for a number of factors which are less relevant for the student of the
common morphological and physiological responses to hormonal action.
Captivity and confinement influence behavior (72-75) and in all likelihood endocrine functioning. As a result, deviations in behavior may be
anticipated in many species transferred from the wild state to that of
207
of hypophyseal hormones in the regulation of nest building, courtship,
and agonistic behavior of the male stickleback, Gasterosteus aculeatus,
but the identity of the hormones has not been established. The relationship is synergistic and more evident in nest building and courtship than
in the initial development of aggressive behavior.
III. The Recording and Measurement of Behavior
The methods of recording and measuring behavior—reviewed by
Denenberg and Banks (59) for the domestic animals—vary from species
to species. Many factors account for this. The technical problems imposed by the behavior of the species selected for study are usually peculiar to that species; they are never common to all. In most species the
behavior displayed by the two sexes tends to be strongly dimorphic and
requires different methodologies. The development of methods has been
influenced by the background, interests, and goals of the investigator.
In a general way methods have ranged from the relatively simple procedures developed by investigators who have used laboratory mammals
—many references are contained in the review by Young (9)—to the
elaborate schema prepared by the psychologists and ethologists who
have followed the sequences or reaction chains in many fishes, birds,
and insects, e.g., Baerends et al. (60), Barrass (61), Fabricius and Lindroth (62), Gabbutt (63), Hinde (64, 65), Lind (66), Morris (67),
Moynihan and Hall (68), Skard (69), Spieth (70), and Wood-Gush
(71). To be sure, not all the behavior described by these investigators
has been related to hormonal activity, but diagrams of the type they
have prepared are an aid in any analysis that is attempted.
Quite apart from the variations in methods imposed by differences
between species and sexes are those assignable to differences in the
training, technical skill, and purposes of the investigator. Furthermore,
over a period of time the methods employed by individual investigators
have changed, for experience with a species leads inevitably to a finer
discernment of the many elements or measures composing the patterns
characteristic of that species. This is well illustrated in the articles by
Beach, Stone, Young, and their associates written during the period
spanning the 1920's through the 1950's.
In any study of the hormones and behavior, allowance must be made
for a number of factors which are less relevant for the student of the
common morphological and physiological responses to hormonal action.
Captivity and confinement influence behavior (72-75) and in all likelihood endocrine functioning. As a result, deviations in behavior may be
anticipated in many species transferred from the wild state to that of