1
|
Following the human point: Research with nonhuman animals since Povinelli, Nelson, and Boysen (1990). Learn Behav 2023; 51:34-47. [PMID: 36175744 DOI: 10.3758/s13420-022-00546-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 09/14/2022] [Indexed: 11/08/2022]
Abstract
For this special issue in honor of Dr. Sarah (Sally) Boysen's career, we review studies on point following in nonhuman animals. Of the 126 papers that we documented on this topic published since the publication of Povinelli, Nelson, and Boysen (1990, Journal of Comparative Psychology, 104, 203-210), 94 (75%) were published in the past 15 years, including 22 in the past 5 years, indicating that this topic is still an active area of interest in the field of animal behavior and cognition. We present results of a survey of publication trends, discussing the species tested and the sample sizes, and we note methodological considerations and current multilaboratory approaches. We then categorize and synthesize the research questions addressed in these studies, which have been at both the ultimate level (e.g., questions related to evolutionary adaptiveness and phylogenetic differences) and proximate level (e.g., questions related to experiential and temperamental processes). Throughout, we consider future directions for this area of research.
Collapse
|
2
|
Bohn M, Liebal K, Oña L, Tessler MH. Great ape communication as contextual social inference: a computational modelling perspective. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 2022; 377:20210096. [PMID: 35876204 PMCID: PMC9310183 DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2021.0096] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/14/2021] [Accepted: 04/04/2022] [Indexed: 01/03/2023] Open
Abstract
Human communication has been described as a contextual social inference process. Research into great ape communication has been inspired by this view to look for the evolutionary roots of the social, cognitive and interactional processes involved in human communication. This approach has been highly productive, yet it is partly compromised by the widespread focus on how great apes use and understand individual signals. This paper introduces a computational model that formalizes great ape communication as a multi-faceted social inference process that integrates (a) information contained in the signals that make up an utterance, (b) the relationship between communicative partners and (c) the social context. This model makes accurate qualitative and quantitative predictions about real-world communicative interactions between semi-wild-living chimpanzees. When enriched with a pragmatic reasoning process, the model explains repeatedly reported differences between humans and great apes in the interpretation of ambiguous signals (e.g. pointing or iconic gestures). This approach has direct implications for observational and experimental studies of great ape communication and provides a new tool for theorizing about the evolution of uniquely human communication. This article is part of the theme issue 'Revisiting the human 'interaction engine': comparative approaches to social action coordination'.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Manuel Bohn
- Department of Comparative Cultural Psychology, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, 04103 Leipzig, Germany
| | - Katja Liebal
- Institute of Biology, Leipzig University, 04103 Leipzig, Germany
| | - Linda Oña
- Naturalistic Social Cognition Group, Max Planck Institute for Human Development, 14195 Berlin, Germany
| | - Michael Henry Tessler
- Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139-4307, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Melis AP, Rossano F. When and how do non-human great apes communicate to support cooperation? Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 2022; 377:20210109. [PMID: 35876197 PMCID: PMC9310173 DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2021.0109] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Several scholars have long suggested that human language and remarkable communicative abilities originate from the need and motivation to cooperate and coordinate actions with others. Yet, little work has focused on when and how great apes communicate during joint action tasks, partly because of the widely held assumption that animal communication is mostly manipulative, but also because non-human great apes' default motivation seems to be competitive rather than cooperative. Here, we review experimental cooperative tasks and show how situational challenges and the degree of asymmetry in terms of knowledge relevant for the joint action task affect the likelihood of communication. We highlight how physical proximity and strength of social bond between the participants affect the occurrence and type of communication. Lastly, we highlight how, from a production point of view, communicators appear capable of calibrating their signalling and controlling their delivery, showing clear evidence of first-order intentionality. On the other hand, recipients appear to struggle in terms of making use of referential information received. We discuss different hypotheses accounting for this asymmetry and provide suggestions concerning how future work could help us unveil to what degree the need for cooperation has shaped our closest living relatives' communicative behaviour.
This article is part of the theme issue ‘Revisiting the human ‘interaction engine’: comparative approaches to social action coordination’.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alicia P. Melis
- Experimental Psychology, University College London, London WC1H 0AP, UK
| | - F. Rossano
- Department of Cognitive Science, University of California San Diego, San Diego CA 92093, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Melis AP, Tomasello M. Chimpanzees ( Pan troglodytes) coordinate by communicating in a collaborative problem-solving task. Proc Biol Sci 2020; 286:20190408. [PMID: 30991932 DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2019.0408] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Successful collaboration often relies on individuals' capacity to communicate with each other. Despite extensive research on chimpanzee communication, there is little evidence that chimpanzees are capable, without extensive human training, of regulating collaborative activities via communication. This study investigated whether pairs of chimpanzees were capable of communicating to ensure coordination during collaborative problem-solving. The chimpanzee pairs needed two tools to extract fruits from an apparatus. The communicator in each pair could see the location of the tools (hidden in one of two boxes), whereas only the recipient could open the boxes. The subjects were first successfully tested for their capacity to understand the pointing gestures of a human who indicated the location of the tools. In a subsequent conspecifics test, the communicator increasingly communicated the tools' location, by approaching the baited box and giving the key needed to open it to the recipients. The recipient used these signals and obtained the tools, transferring one of the tools to the communicator so that the pair could collaborate in obtaining the fruits. The study suggests that chimpanzees have the necessary socio-cognitive skills to naturally develop a simple communicative strategy to ensure coordination in a collaborative task.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alicia P Melis
- 1 Warwick Business School (Behavioural Science), The University of Warwick , Coventry CV4 7AL , UK
| | - Michael Tomasello
- 2 Duke University (Psychology and Neuroscience) , PO Box 90086, Durham, NC 27708 , USA
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Clark H, Elsherif MM, Leavens DA. Ontogeny vs. phylogeny in primate/canid comparisons: A meta-analysis of the object choice task. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 2019; 105:178-189. [PMID: 31170434 DOI: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2019.06.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/27/2019] [Revised: 05/25/2019] [Accepted: 06/02/2019] [Indexed: 10/26/2022]
Abstract
The Object Choice Task (OCT) is a widely used paradigm with which researchers measure the ability of a subject to comprehend deictic (directional) cues, such as pointing gestures and eye gaze. There is a widespread belief that nonhuman primates evince only a weak capacity to use deictic cues; in contrast, domestic dogs (Canis lupus familiaris) tend to demonstrate high success rates. This pattern of canid superiority has been taken to support the Domestication Hypothesis, which posits enhancing effects of artificial selection on the sociocognitive abilities of dogs and humans. Here we review nearly two decades of published findings, using variants of the OCT. We find systematic confounds with species classification in task-relevant preparation of the subjects, in the imposition of a barrier between reward and subject, and in the specific deictic cues used to indicate the location of hidden objects. Thus, the widespread belief that dogs outperform primates on OCTs is undermined by the systematic procedural differences in the assessments of these skills, differences that are confounded with taxonomic classification.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hannah Clark
- School of Psychology, University of Sussex, Falmer, East Sussex, BN1 9QH, United Kingdom
| | - Mahmoud M Elsherif
- School of Psychology, University of Sussex, Falmer, East Sussex, BN1 9QH, United Kingdom; School of Psychology, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TT, United Kingdom
| | - David A Leavens
- School of Psychology, University of Sussex, Falmer, East Sussex, BN1 9QH, United Kingdom.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Kano F, Moore R, Krupenye C, Hirata S, Tomonaga M, Call J. Human ostensive signals do not enhance gaze following in chimpanzees, but do enhance object-oriented attention. Anim Cogn 2018; 21:715-728. [PMID: 30051325 DOI: 10.1007/s10071-018-1205-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/20/2018] [Revised: 07/13/2018] [Accepted: 07/22/2018] [Indexed: 02/05/2023]
Abstract
The previous studies have shown that human infants and domestic dogs follow the gaze of a human agent only when the agent has addressed them ostensively-e.g., by making eye contact, or calling their name. This evidence is interpreted as showing that they expect ostensive signals to precede referential information. The present study tested chimpanzees, one of the closest relatives to humans, in a series of eye-tracking experiments using an experimental design adapted from these previous studies. In the ostension conditions, a human actor made eye contact, called the participant's name, and then looked at one of two objects. In the control conditions, a salient cue, which differed in each experiment (a colorful object, the actor's nodding, or an eating action), attracted participants' attention to the actor's face, and then the actor looked at the object. Overall, chimpanzees followed the actor's gaze to the cued object in both ostension and control conditions, and the ostensive signals did not enhance gaze following more than the control attention-getters. However, the ostensive signals enhanced subsequent attention to both target and distractor objects (but not to the actor's face) more strongly than the control attention-getters-especially in the chimpanzees who had a close relationship with human caregivers. We interpret this as showing that chimpanzees have a simple form of communicative expectations on the basis of ostensive signals, but unlike human infants and dogs, they do not subsequently use the experimenter's gaze to infer the intended referent. These results may reflect a limitation of non-domesticated species for interpreting humans' ostensive signals in inter-species communication.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fumihiro Kano
- Kumamoto Sanctuary, Kyoto University, 990 Misumi, Uki, Kumamoto, 8693201, Japan.
| | - Richard Moore
- Berlin School of Mind and Brain, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Christopher Krupenye
- Department of Developmental and Comparative Psychology, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Leipzig, Germany.,School of Psychology and Neuroscience, University of St. Andrews, St. Andrews, UK
| | - Satoshi Hirata
- Kumamoto Sanctuary, Kyoto University, 990 Misumi, Uki, Kumamoto, 8693201, Japan
| | - Masaki Tomonaga
- Primate Research Institute, Kyoto University, Inuyama, Japan
| | - Josep Call
- Department of Developmental and Comparative Psychology, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Leipzig, Germany.,School of Psychology and Neuroscience, University of St. Andrews, St. Andrews, UK
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Abstract
In the current study, 24- to 27-month-old children (N = 37) used pointing gestures in a cooperative object choice task with either peer or adult partners. When indicating the location of a hidden toy, children pointed equally accurately for adult and peer partners but more often for adult partners. When choosing from one of three hiding places, children used adults' pointing to find a hidden toy significantly more often than they used peers'. In interaction with peers, children's choice behavior was at chance level. These results suggest that toddlers ascribe informative value to adults' but not peers' pointing gestures, and highlight the role of children's social expectations in their communicative development.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gregor Kachel
- Department of Developmental and Comparative Psychology, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Leipzig, Germany.,Faculty of Social and Educational Sciences, University of Applied Sciences Potsdam, Germany
| | - Richard Moore
- Department of Developmental and Comparative Psychology, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Leipzig, Germany.,Berlin School of Mind and Brain, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Germany
| | - Michael Tomasello
- Department of Developmental and Comparative Psychology, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Leipzig, Germany.,Department of Psychology and Neuroscience, Duke University, North Carolina, USA
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Völter CJ, Rossano F, Call J. Social manipulation in nonhuman primates: Cognitive and motivational determinants. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 2016; 82:76-94. [PMID: 27639446 DOI: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2016.09.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/02/2016] [Revised: 09/09/2016] [Accepted: 09/13/2016] [Indexed: 10/21/2022]
Abstract
Social interactions are the result of individuals' cooperative and competitive tendencies expressed over an extended period of time. Although social manipulation, i.e., using another individual to achieve one's own goals, is a crucial aspect of social interactions, there has been no comprehensive attempt to differentiate its various types and to map its cognitive and motivational determinants. For this purpose, we survey in this article the experimental literature on social interactions in nonhuman primates. We take social manipulation, illustrated by a case study with orangutans (Pongo abelii), as our starting point and move in two directions. First, we will focus on a flexibility/sociality axis that includes technical problem solving, social tool-use and communication. Second, we will focus on a motivational/prosociality axis that includes exploitation, cooperation, and helping. Combined, the two axes offer a way to capture a broad range of social interactions performed by human and nonhuman primates.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- C J Völter
- School of Psychology and Neuroscience, University of St Andrews, St Andrews, UK; Department of Developmental and Comparative Psychology, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Leipzig, Germany.
| | - F Rossano
- Department of Cognitive Science, University of California, San Diego, USA
| | - J Call
- School of Psychology and Neuroscience, University of St Andrews, St Andrews, UK; Department of Developmental and Comparative Psychology, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Leipzig, Germany
| |
Collapse
|