Hika Kuroshima

How Do Tufted Capuchin Monkeys (Cebus apella) Understand Causality Involved in Tool Use

Four tufted capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) were trained to choose from 2 hook-like tools, 1 of which successfully led to collecting food, whereas the other did not because of inappropriate spatial arrangement of the tool and the food. In Experiment 1, all of the monkeys successfully learned the basic task. The monkeys performed successfully with tools of novel colors and shapes in Experiments 2-5. These results demonstrate that the monkeys used the spatial arrangement of the tool and the food as a cue. However, they failed when there were obstacles (Experiment 6) or traps (Experiment 7) on the path along which the monkeys dragged tools. These results may suggest that capuchin monkeys understand the spatial relationship between 2 items, namely, food and the tool, but do not understand the spatial relationship among 3 items, namely, food, tool, and the environmental condition. The possible role of stimulus generalization is also considered.

Cooperative problem solving by tufted capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella): Spontaneous division of labor, communication, and reciprocal altruism.

Using an experimentally induced cooperation task, the authors investigated whether tufted capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) share the following 3 characteristics of cooperation with humans: division of labor, communication, and reciprocal altruism. In Experiment 1, the authors trained individual monkeys to perform the necessary sequence of actions for rewards and tested them in pairs to assess whether they could solve the task by spontaneously dividing the sequence of actions. All pairs solved this task. In Experiment 2, monkeys worked in the cooperation task and a task requiring no partner help. They looked at the partner significantly longer in the former task than in the latter, but communicative intent could not be determined. In Experiment 3, only 1 of 2 participants obtained a reward on each trial. Monkeys maintained cooperation when their roles were reversed on alternate trials. Their cooperative performances demonstrated division of labor; results suggest task-related communication and reciprocal altruism.

Tufted capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) show understanding of human attentional states when requesting food held by a human

Researchers have investigated to what extent non-human primates understand others’ attentional states, as this ability is considered an important prerequisite for theory of mind. However, previous studies using food requesting tasks have failed to show that non-human primates attribute perception to others as a function of their attentional states. One possible reason is that food requesting tasks may require subjects not only to take into account an experimenter’s attentional state but also to direct it toward the food. The present study tested tufted capuchin monkeys’ (Cebus apella) understanding of others’ attentional states in a food requesting task. In the first situation, monkeys were required only to attract an experimenter’s attention. In the second situation, the monkeys were required to both attract the experimenter’s attention and direct it toward food on a table. The results revealed that capuchin monkeys showed evidence of understanding the experimenter’s attentional variations only in the former condition. This suggests that previous tasks, requiring referential gestures, lacking in most non-human primates, failed to reveal sensitivity to human attentional states because the subjects might not have understood the requesting situation. In conclusion, capuchin monkeys can understand variations in others’ attentional states, although this ability appears limited compared to what is seen in humans.

A Capuchin monkey (Cebus apella) recognizes when people do and do not know the location of food.

In a previous study, Kuroshima and colleagues demonstrated that capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) learned to discriminate between a “knower” who inspected a box for food, and a “guesser” who did not. The aim of the present study was to specify whether the subjects learned a simple conditional discrimination or a causal relationship that seeing leads to knowing. In experiment 1, we introduced five types of novel containers to two subjects. Each container was of different shape and color. The subjects gradually learned to reach toward the container the knower suggested. In experiment 2, we diversified the behavior of the knower and the guesser. In experiment 3, in order to eliminate the possibility of discrimination based on differences in the magnitude and the complexity of two trainers, we equated their behaviors. One subject adapted to the novel behaviors of the knower and the guesser, successfully discriminating the two trainers. Thus this monkey clearly learned to use the inspecting action of the knower and the non-inspecting action of the guesser as a discriminative cue to recognize the baited container. This result suggests that one capuchin monkey learned to recognize the relationship between seeing and knowing.

Are monkeys aesthetists? Rensch (1957) revisited

Three experiments assessed whether capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) and squirrel monkeys (Saimiri sciureus) prefer regular and symmetrical visual patterns. Pictorial representations of faces were included in 1 stimulus set. When the monkeys could pick up and manipulate small cards bearing the stimuli, all preferences expressed by capuchins and most of those expressed by squirrel monkeys were for regular stimuli. Symmetry of the patterns was influential but not essential. Some preferences were also found for faces. When images of the patterns were presented on a touch screen, capuchins continued to express preferences especially for regular and symmetrical stimuli, but they showed some avoidance of faces. Squirrel monkeys responded less discriminatingly to the touch screen stimuli. The findings provide support for B. Renschs (1957) claim that monkeys prefer visual stimuli that humans find aesthetically pleasing.

Capuchin monkeys judge third-party reciprocity

Increasing interest is being shown in how children develop an understanding of reciprocity in social exchanges and fairness in resource distribution, including social exchanges between third parties. Although there are descriptions of reciprocity on a one-to-one basis in other species, whether nonhumans detect reciprocity and violations of reciprocity between third parties is unknown. Here we show that capuchin monkeys discriminate between humans who reciprocate in a social exchange with others and those who do not. Monkeys more readily accepted food from reciprocators than non-reciprocators or partial reciprocators. However, when exchange asymmetry was due to one partner starting out with fewer goods, the initially impoverished reciprocator was not discriminated against. These results indicate that the cognitive or emotional prerequisites for judging reciprocity in third-party social exchanges exist in at least one other primate species.

Do squirrel monkeys (Saimiri sciureus) and capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) predict that looking leads to touching

Squirrel monkeys (Saimiri sciureus) and capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) were tested using an expectancy violation procedure to assess whether they use an actor’s gaze direction, signaled by congruent head and eye orientation, to predict subsequent behavior. The monkeys visually habituated to a repeated sequence in which the actor (a familiar human or a puppet) looked at an object and then picked it up, but they did not react strongly when the actor looked at an object but then picked up another object. Capuchin monkeys’ responses in the puppet condition were slightly more suggestive of expectancy. There was no differential responding to congruent versus incongruent look–touch sequences when familiarization trials were omitted. The weak findings contrast with a strongly positive result previously reported for tamarin monkeys. Additional evidence is required before concluding that behavior prediction based on gaze cues typifies primates; other approaches for studying how they process attention cues are indicated.

Flexibility in the use of requesting gestures in squirrel monkeys (Saimiri sciureus)

Three squirrel monkeys, trained to make a requesting gesture, were tested in the presence of a human assistant whose visual attention varied across trials. When food was available in one dish and an empty dish was nearby, the monkeys pointed overwhelmingly toward the former, regardless of where the assistant was looking. Looking at the assistant while pointing (“monitoring”) peaked when she looked at them and when she attempted to engage them in joint attention. When only one dish was present, the monkeys refrained from gesturing if it was empty and if no assistant was present. They gestured more when the assistant made eye contact with them. Furthermore, when the assistants focus of attention switched from the dish or the ceiling to the monkeys, the latter resumed pointing and increased their monitoring of the assistant. This is the first demonstration of such flexible use of an intentionally communicative requesting gesture in New World monkeys. Am. J. Primatol. 72:707–714, 2010.

Attention to combined attention in New World monkeys (Cebus apella, Saimiri sciureus).

Co-orientation by capuchin (Cebus apella) and squirrel (Saimiri sciureus) monkeys in response to familiar humans abruptly switching the direction of their visual attention was recorded. Co-orientation occurred more frequently overall in capuchins than squirrel monkeys. Capuchins showed a tendency to habituate within trials involving consecutive attention switches performed by 2 different people, whereas squirrel monkeys co-oriented more when the 2nd attention switch was by a 2nd actor. These results suggest variable attention-processing abilities in New World monkeys, including differences in summation of attention by others.

Learning and generalization of tool use by tufted capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) in tasks involving three factors: reward, tool, and hindrance.

We tested 4 captive tufted capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) for their understanding of physical causality in variations of a 2-choice tool use task, 1 alternative of which allowed the monkeys easier access to food. Our monkeys, who had been adept at this task involving 2 items, that is, tool and food, quickly learned 3-term problems involving food, tool, and 1 type of hindrance (an obstacle or a trap, which could prevent success). All of the monkeys generalized their performance to new problems with the other type of hindrance and those with another familiar tool. These results suggest flexibility of their abilities to process complex physical information comprising 3 items in the environment, that is food-tool-hindrance spatial relationships. Such flexibility also implies that capuchin monkeys may possess rudimentary understanding of causal relationships involved in tool use.