Capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) succeed in a test of quantity conservation

Capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) modulate their use of an uncertainty response depending on risk

Metacognition refers to thinking about thinking, and there has been a great deal of interest in how this ability manifests across primates. Based on much of the work to date, a tentative division has been drawn with New World monkeys on 1 side and Old World monkeys and apes on the other. Specifically, Old World monkeys, apes, and humans often show patterns reflecting metacognition, but New World monkeys typically do not, or show less convincing behavioral patterns. However, recent data suggest that this difference may relate to other aspects of some experimental tasks. For example, 1 possibility is that risk tolerance affects how capuchin monkeys, a New World primate species, tend to perform. Specifically, it has recently been argued that on tasks in which there are 2 or 3 options, the "risk" of guessing is tolerable for capuchins because there is a high probability of being correct even if they "know they do not know" or feel something akin to uncertainty. The current study investigated this possibility by manipulating the degree of risk (2-choices vs. 6-choices) and found that capuchin monkeys used the uncertainty response more on 6-choice trials than on 2-choice trials. We also found that rate of reward does not appear to underlie these patterns of performance, and propose that the degree of risk is modulating capuchin monkeys' use of the uncertainty response. Thus, the apparent differences between New and Old World monkeys in metacognition may reflect differences in risk tolerance rather than access to metacognitive states.

Does presentation format influence visual size discrimination in tufted capuchin monkeys (Sapajus spp.)?

Most experimental paradigms to study visual cognition in humans and non-human species are based on discrimination tasks involving the choice between two or more visual stimuli. To this end, different types of stimuli and procedures for stimuli presentation are used, which highlights the necessity to compare data obtained with different methods. The present study assessed whether, and to what extent, capuchin monkeys' ability to solve a size discrimination problem is influenced by the type of procedure used to present the problem. Capuchins' ability to generalise knowledge across different tasks was also evaluated. We trained eight adult tufted capuchin monkeys to select the larger of two stimuli of the same shape and different sizes by using pairs of food items (Experiment 1), computer images (Experiment 1) and objects (Experiment 2). Our results indicated that monkeys achieved the learning criterion faster with food stimuli compared to both images and objects. They also required consistently fewer trials with objects than with images. Moreover, female capuchins had higher levels of acquisition accuracy with food stimuli than with images. Finally, capuchins did not immediately transfer the solution of the problem acquired in one task condition to the other conditions. Overall, these findings suggest that--even in relatively simple visual discrimination problems where a single perceptual dimension (i.e., size) has to be judged--learning speed strongly depends on the mode of presentation.

What are my chances? Closing the gap in uncertainty monitoring between rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta) and capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella)

Previous studies have indicated that rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta) but not capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) respond to difficult or ambiguous situations by choosing not to respond or by seeking more information. Here we assessed whether a task with very low chance accuracy could diminish this species difference, presumably indicating that capuchins—compared to macaques—are less risk averse as opposed to less sensitive to signals of uncertainty. Monkeys searched for the largest of 6 stimuli on a computer screen. Trial difficulty was varied, and monkeys could choose to opt out of any trial. All rhesus monkeys, including some with no prior use of the uncertainty response, selectively avoided the most difficult trials. The majority of capuchins sometimes made uncertainty responses, but at lower rates than rhesus monkeys. Nonetheless, the presence of some adaptive uncertainty responding suggests that capuchins also experience uncertainty and can respond to it, though with less proficiency than macaque monkeys.

Prosimian primates show ratio dependence in spontaneous quantity discriminations

We directly tested the predictions of the approximate number system (ANS) and the object file system in the spontaneous numerical judgments of prosimian primates. Prior work indicates that when human infants and a few species of non-human animals are given a single-trial choice between two sequentially baited buckets they choose the bucket with the greater amount of food but only when the quantities are small. This pattern of results has been interpreted as evidence that a limited capacity object file system is used to track small numbers of objects and that the ANS is not invoked under these circumstances. Here we tested prosimian primates in food choice comparisons that were chosen to contrast predictions of the ANS and object file systems. We found that prosimian primates consistently chose the larger of two sets when they differed by a 1:3 ratio regardless of whether both values were small (≤3), both values were large (>3), or there was one small and one large value. Prosimians were not able to robustly discriminate quantities that differed by a 1:2 ratio for the same three conditions, nor did they show a preference for small quantities that differed by a 2:3 ratio. These results implicate the ANS in the spontaneous numerical discriminations of non-human primates.

Sequential responding and planning in capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella)

Previous experiments have assessed planning during sequential responding to computer generated stimuli by Old World nonhuman primates including chimpanzees and rhesus macaques. However, no such assessment has been made with a New World primate species. Capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) are an interesting test case for assessing the distribution of cognitive processes in the Order Primates because they sometimes show proficiency in tasks also mastered by apes and Old World monkeys, but in other cases fail to match the proficiency of those other species. In two experiments, eight capuchin monkeys selected five arbitrary stimuli in distinct locations on a computer monitor in a learned sequence. In Experiment 1, shift trials occurred in which the second and third stimuli were transposed when the first stimulus was selected by the animal. In Experiment 2, mask trials occurred in which all remaining stimuli were masked after the monkey selected the first stimulus. Monkeys made more mistakes on trials in which the locations of the second and third stimuli were interchanged than on trials in which locations were not interchanged, suggesting they had already planned to select a location that no longer contained the correct stimulus. When mask trials occurred, monkeys performed at levels significantly better than chance, but their performance exceeded chance levels only for the first and the second selections on a trial. These data indicate that capuchin monkeys performed very similarly to chimpanzees and rhesus monkeys and appeared to plan their selection sequences during the computerized task, but only to a limited degree.

The role of numerical competence in a specialized predatory strategy of an araneophagic spider

Although a wide range of vertebrates have been considered in research on numerical competence, little is known about the role of number-related decisions in the predatory strategies of invertebrates. Here, we investigate how numerical competence is expressed in a highly specialized predatory strategy adopted by the small juveniles of Portia africana when practicing communal predation, with the prey being another spider, Oecobius amboseli. Two or more P. africana juveniles sometimes settle by the same oecobiid nest and then share the meal after one individual captures the oecobiid. Experiments were designed to clarify how these predators use number-related cues in conjunction with non-numerical cues when deciding whether to settle at a nest. We used lures (dead spiders positioned in lifelike posture) arranged in a series of 24 different scenes defined by the type, configuration and especially number of lures. On the whole, our findings suggest that P. africana juveniles base settling decisions on the specific number of already settled conspecific juveniles at the nest and express a preference for settling when the number is one instead of zero, two or three. By varying the size of the already settled juveniles and their positions around the nest, we show that factors related to continuous variables and stimulus configuration are unlikely explanations for our findings.

Multimodal semantic quantity representations: further evidence from korean sign language

Korean deaf signers performed a number comparison task on pairs of Arabic digits. In their response times profiles, the expected magnitude effect was systematically modified by properties of number signs in Korean sign language in a culture-specific way (not observed in hearing and deaf Germans or hearing Chinese). We conclude that finger-based quantity representations are automatically activated even in simple tasks with symbolic input although this may be irrelevant and even detrimental for task performance. These finger-based numerical representations are accessed in addition to another, more basic quantity system which is evidenced by the magnitude effect. In sum, these results are inconsistent with models assuming only one single amodal representation of numerical quantity.

Can nonhuman primates use tokens to represent and sum quantities?

It is unclear whether nonhuman animals can use physical tokens to flexibly represent various quantities by combining token values. Previous studies showed that chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and a macaque (Macaca mulatta) were only partly successful in tests involving sets of different-looking food containers representing different food quantities, while some capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) have shown greater success in tests involving sets of various concrete objects representing different food quantities. Some of the discrepancy in results between these studies may be attributed to the different methods used. In an effort to reconcile these discrepancies, we presented two primates species, chimpanzees and capuchin monkeys, with two token tasks. The critical test in each task involved summing the value of multiple tokens of different types to make accurate quantity judgments. We found that, using either method, individuals of both species learned to associate individual tokens with specific quantities, as well as successfully compare individual tokens to one another or to sets of visible food items. However, regardless of method, only a few individuals exhibited the capacity to sum multiple tokens of different types and then use those summed values to make an optimal response. This suggests that flexible combination of symbolic stimuli in quantity judgments tasks is within the abilities of chimpanzees and capuchins but does not characterize the majority of individuals. Furthermore, the results suggest the need to carefully examine specific methodological details that may promote or hinder such possible representation.

Can monkeys make investments based on maximized pay-off?

Animals can maximize benefits but it is not known if they adjust their investment according to expected pay-offs. We investigated whether monkeys can use different investment strategies in an exchange task. We tested eight capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) and thirteen macaques (Macaca fascicularis, Macaca tonkeana) in an experiment where they could adapt their investment to the food amounts proposed by two different experimenters. One, the doubling partner, returned a reward that was twice the amount given by the subject, whereas the other, the fixed partner, always returned a constant amount regardless of the amount given. To maximize pay-offs, subjects should invest a maximal amount with the first partner and a minimal amount with the second. When tested with the fixed partner only, one third of monkeys learned to remove a maximal amount of food for immediate consumption before investing a minimal one. With both partners, most subjects failed to maximize pay-offs by using different decision rules with each partner' quality. A single Tonkean macaque succeeded in investing a maximal amount to one experimenter and a minimal amount to the other. The fact that only one of over 21 subjects learned to maximize benefits in adapting investment according to experimenters' quality indicates that such a task is difficult for monkeys, albeit not impossible.

How is human cooperation different?

Although cooperation is a widespread phenomenon in nature, human cooperation exceeds that of all other species with regard to the scale and range of cooperative activities. Here we review and discuss differences between humans and non-humans in the strategies employed to maintain cooperation and control free-riders. We distinguish forms of cooperative behaviour based on their influence on the immediate payoffs of actor and recipient. If the actor has immediate costs and only the recipient obtains immediate benefits, we term this investment. If the behaviour has immediate positive effects for both actor and recipient, we call this a self-serving mutually beneficial behaviour or mutual cooperation. We argue that humans, in contrast to all other species, employ a wider range of enforcement mechanisms, which allow higher levels of cooperation to evolve and stabilize among unrelated individuals and in large groups. We also discuss proximate mechanisms underlying cooperative behaviour and focus on our experimental work with humans and our closest primate relatives. Differences in the proximate mechanisms also seem to contribute to explaining humans' greater ability to cooperate and enforce cooperation.

Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) accurately compare poured liquid quantities

Although many studies have shown that nonhuman animals can choose the larger of two discrete quantities of items, less emphasis has been given to discrimination of continuous quantity. These studies are necessary to discern the similarities and differences in discrimination performance as a function of the type of quantities that are compared. Chimpanzees made judgments between continuous quantities (liquids) in a series of three experiments. In the first experiment, chimpanzees first chose between two clear containers holding differing amounts of juice. Next, they watched as two liquid quantities were dispensed from opaque syringes held above opaque containers. In the second experiment, one liquid amount was presented by pouring it into an opaque container from an opaque syringe, whereas the other quantity was visible the entire time in a clear container. In the third experiment, the heights at which the opaque syringes were held above opaque containers differed for each set, so that sometimes sets with smaller amounts of juice were dropped from a greater height, providing a possible visual illusion as to the total amount. Chimpanzees succeeded in all tasks and showed many similarities in their continuous quantity estimation to how they performed previously in similar tasks with discrete quantities (for example, performance was constrained by the ratio between sets). Chimpanzees could compare visible sets to nonvisible sets, and they were not distracted by perceptual illusions created through various presentation styles that were not relevant to the actual amount of juice dispensed. This performance demonstrated a similarity in the quantitative discrimination skills of chimpanzees for continuous quantities that matches that previously shown for discrete quantities.

The psychological organization of "uncertainty" responses and "middle" responses: a dissociation in capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella)

Some studies of nonhuman animals' metacognitive capacity encourage competing low-level, behavioral descriptions of trial-decline responses by animals in uncertainty-monitoring tasks. To evaluate the force of these behavioral descriptions, the authors presented 6 capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) with 2 density discrimination tasks between sparse and dense stimuli. In one task, difficult trials with stimuli near the middle of the density continuum could be declined through an "uncertainty" response. In the other task, making a "middle" response to the same stimuli was rewarded. In Experiment 1, capuchins essentially did not use the uncertainty response, but they did use the middle response. In Experiment 2, the authors replicated this result with 5 of 6 monkeys while equating the overall pace and reinforcement structure of the 2 tasks, although 1 monkey also showed appropriate use of the uncertainty response. These results challenge a purely associative interpretation of some uncertainty-monitoring performances by monkeys while sharpening the theoretical question concerning the nature of the psychological signal that occasions uncertainty responses.

Food and token quantity discrimination in capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella)

Quantity discrimination is adaptive in a variety of ecological contexts and different taxa discriminate stimuli differing in numerousness, both in the wild and in laboratory settings. Quantity discrimination between object arrays has been suggested to be more demanding than between food arrays but, to our knowledge, the same paradigm has never been used to directly compare them. We investigated to what extent capuchin monkeys' relative numerousness judgments (RNJs) with food and token are alike. Tokens are inherently non-valuable objects that acquire an associative value upon exchange with the experimenter. Our aims were (1) to assess capuchins' RNJs with food (Experiment 1) and with tokens (Experiment 2) by presenting all the possible pair-wise choices between one to five items, and (2) to evaluate on which of the two proposed non-verbal mechanisms underlying quantity discrimination (analogue magnitude and object file system) capuchins relied upon. In both conditions capuchins reliably selected the larger amount of items, although their performance was higher with food than with tokens. The influence of the ratio between arrays on performance indicates that capuchins relied on the same system for numerical representation, namely analogue magnitude, regardless of the type of stimuli (food or tokens) and across both the small and large number ranges.