Document 8: Behavioural analysis

Behavioural analysis. Results of phase 3.

The resulting test subjects from the phase three experiments have been limited to 200 samples, due to safety concerns. The subjects were divided into four groups and monitored. The aim of this experiment was to observe the formation in social hierarchies in subjects who have been kept in individual enclosures for their short lives.

It is expected that group one will not change. Group two will force increased aggression and competition for food. Group three is expected to be somewhat violent. Group four is expected to be extremely violent. Some subjects may not survive.

All groups were observed for two weeks from 28/6 to 12/7

Group 1, Subjects 001 - 050
Conditions: Solitary (Control)
Results: Low activity. Body functions not interrupted.

Group 2, Subjects 051 - 100
Conditions: Group of 5
Results: Cooperative. Shared food evenly and were less aggressive.

Group 3, Subjects 101 - 150
Conditions: Group of 10
Results: Cooperative. Formed simple hierarchy based on strength and size.

Group 4, Subjects 151 - 200
Conditions: Communal
Results: Aggressive. Formed into groups with independent hierarchies and fought in groups against one another. Food was split between groups based on rank and merit.

Each group was expected to be violent, but the data presents a different story. It appears as if a social structure has formed around strength and merit in combat that mirrors early tribal militias. This may be an indicator of advanced intelligence. Subjects appear to learn from and teach one another. Further experimentation shows a clear correlation between enclosure population and intelligence of subjects. Groups seem to be organized thusly. Leader, Subgroup leader, Soldier. Promotions from a soldier to a subgroup leader seem to be based on individual ability in battle. The leader seems to be chosen by the group and replaced after losing a battle. The dethroned leader is relegated to a subgroup commander and takes the new leaders old command. The current leader seems to give lower authority to the previous leader. The factions formed in group four’s enclosure would take territory and try to control the points where food would enter the enclosure. To encourage movement of territories, the lab hands in charge of food would put it in at different points. Fights would break out over points where they had learned that food enters regularly. They would cede territory if food did not enter there. There behaviour mirrored that of bacterial colonies or sovereign nations. Groups two and three weren’t sufficiently large to factionalize and formed hierarchies with a leader and everyone else. They seemed to hold gladiatorial contests, for lack of a better term, and use the results to establish ranks on their respective tiers. Group one were serving as the control group. No changes in conditions or diet were administered and they did not experience any significant changes.

As part of further research into their psychology, the subjects will be placed back into solitary enclosures and their reactions observed. After that, they will be shuffled and put into different groups. The blocks will not change, but no subject will be in the same enclosure as one they have known previously.