首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
相似文献
 共查询到9条相似文献,搜索用时 0 毫秒
1.
We tested 6 chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes), 3 orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus), 4 bonobos (Pan paniscus), and 2 gorillas (Gorilla gorilla) in the reversed reward contingency task. Individuals were presented with pairs of quantities ranging between 0 and 6 food items. Prior to testing, some experienced apes had solved this task using 2 quantities while others were totally na?ve. Experienced apes transferred their ability to multiple-novel pairs after 6 to 19 months had elapsed since their initial testing. Two out of 6 na?ve apes (1 chimpanzee, 1 bonobo) solved the task--a proportion comparable to that of a previous study using 2 pairs of quantities. Their acquisition speed was also comparable to the successful subjects from that study. The ratio between quantities explained a large portion of the variance but affected na?ve and experienced individuals differently. For smaller ratios, na?ve individuals were well below 50% correct and experienced ones were well above 50%, yet both groups tended to converge toward 50% for larger ratios. Thus, some apes require no procedural modifications to overcome their strong bias for selecting the larger of 2 quantities. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)  相似文献   

2.
The ability to share attention with another is the foundation on which other theory of mind skills are formed. The quality of care received during infancy has been correlated with increased joint attention in humans. The purpose of this study was to assess the effects of care style (responsive or basic) and caregiver type (ape or human) during the first 6 months on joint attention in 4 great ape species (Pan troglodytes, Gorilla gorilla, Pongo spp., and Pan pansicus). Great apes engaged in joint attention with conspecifics and humans regardless of the style of early care they experienced from either a great ape mother or human caregiver. This finding suggests that joint attention is a robust ability in great apes that is resilient against at least some differences in early care. Future studies using additional measures of early care quality are recommended. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)  相似文献   

3.
The authors examined quantity-based judgments for up to 10 items for simultaneous and sequential whole sets as well as for sequentially dropped items in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes), gorillas (Gorilla gorilla), bonobos (Pan paniscus), and orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus). In Experiment 1, subjects had to choose the larger of 2 quantities presented in 2 separate dishes either simultaneously or 1 dish after the other. Representatives of all species were capable of selecting the larger of 2 quantities in both conditions, even when the quantities were large and the numerical distance between them was small. In Experiment 2, subjects had to select between the same food quantities sequentially dropped into 2 opaque cups so that none of the quantities were ever viewed as a whole. The authors found some evidence (albeit weaker) that subjects were able to select the larger quantity of items. Furthermore, the authors found no performance breakdown with the inclusion of certain quantities. Instead, the ratio between quantities was the best performance predictor. The authors conclude that quantity-based judgments rely on an analogical system, not a discrete object file model or perceptual estimation mechanism, such as subitizing. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)  相似文献   

4.
Great apes appear to be the nonhuman primates most capable of recognizing trading opportunities and engaging in transfers of commodities with conspecifics. Spontaneous exchange of goods between them has not yet been reported. We tested gorillas (Gorilla gorilla), orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus), bonobos (Pan paniscus), and chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) in a token-exchange task involving two conspecifics and a human experimenter. Tested in pairs, subjects had to exchange tokens with a partner to obtain food from the experimenter. We observed 4, 5, 264, and 328 transfers of tokens in gorillas, chimpanzees, orangutans, and bonobos, respectively. Most gifts were indirect in gorillas, chimpanzees, and bonobos, whereas most were direct in orangutans. The analysis showed no evidence of calculated reciprocity in interactions. A main finding of the study was the high rate of repeated gifts and begging gestures recorded in orangutans. This raises the question of the meaning of pointing in great apes and their ability to understand the communicative intent of others. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)  相似文献   

5.
Three experiments modeled after infant studies were run on four great ape species (Gorilla gorilla, Pongo pygmaeus, Pan troglodytes, Pan paniscus) to investigate their reasoning about solidity and gravity constraints. The aims were: (a) to find out if great apes are subject to gravity biased search or display sensitivity for object solidity, (b) to check for species differences, and (c) to assess if a gravity hypothesis or more parsimonious explanations best account for failures observed. Results indicate that great apes, unlike monkeys, show no reliable gravity bias, that ape species slightly differ in terms of their performance, and that the errors made are best explained by a gravity account. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)  相似文献   

6.
The authors administered a series of object displacement tasks to 24 great apes and 24 30-month-old children (Homo sapiens). Objects were placed under 1 or 2 of 3 cups by visible or invisible displacements. The series included 6 tasks: delayed response, inhibition test, A not B, rotations, transpositions, and object permanence. Apes and children solved most tasks performing at comparable levels except in the transposition task, in which apes performed better than children. Ape species performed at comparable levels in all tasks except in single transpositions, in which chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and bonobos (Pan paniscus) performed better than gorillas (Gorilla gorilla) and orangutans (Pongo pygmeaus). All species found nonadjacent trials and rotations especially difficult. The number of elements that changed locations, the type of displacement, and having to inhibit predominant reaching responses were factors that negatively affected the subjects' performance. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)  相似文献   

7.
Primates' understanding of tool functionality has been investigated extensively using a paradigm in which subjects are presented with a tool that they must use to obtain an out-of-reach reward. After being given experience on an initial problem, monkeys can transfer their skill to tools of different shapes while ignoring irrelevant tool changes (e.g., color). In contrast, monkeys without initial training perform poorly on the same tasks. Compared to most monkeys, great apes show a clear propensity for tool using and may not require as much experience to succeed on tool functionality tasks. We investigated this question by presenting 171 apes (Pan troglodytes, Pan paniscus, Gorilla gorilla, and Pongo pygmaeus) with several tool-use problems without giving them initial training or familiarizing them with the test materials. Apes succeeded without experience, but only on problems based on basic properties such as the reward being supported by an object. However, only minimal experience was sufficient to allow them to quickly improve their performance on more complex problems in which the reward was not in contact with the tool. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)  相似文献   

8.
Bonobos (Pan paniscus; n = 4), chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes; n = 12), gorillas (Gorilla gorilla; n = 8), and orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus; n = 6) were presented with 2 cups (1 baited) and given visual or auditory information about their contents. Visual information consisted of letting subjects look inside the cups. Auditory information consisted of shaking the cup so that the baited cup produced a rattling sound. Subjects correctly selected the baited cup both when they saw or heard the food. Nine individuals were above chance in both visual and auditory conditions. More important, subjects as a group selected the baited cup when only the empty cup was either shown or shaken, which means that subjects chose correctly without having seen or heard the food (i.e., inference by exclusion). Control tests showed that subjects were not more attracted to noisy cups, avoided shaken noiseless cups, or learned to use auditory information as a cue during the study. It is concluded that subjects understood that the food caused the noise, not simply that the noise was associated with the food. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)  相似文献   

9.
To explore the relationship between problem solving and inhibitory control, the authors present 4 experiments on cotton-top tamarins (Saguinus oedipus) using a reverse-reward contingency task. In Experiment 1, 1 group of tamarins was given a choice between a small and a large quantity of food. Whichever quantity the tamarins reached for first, they received the alternative. The tamarins consistently picked the larger quantity, thereby receiving the smaller. A 2nd group of tamarins was given the same task, except that if they reached for the larger quantity of food, they received nothing. The tamarins continued to pick the larger quantity, even though this resulted in no food. In addition, most of the tamarins continued to pick the larger quantity even when the food payoff for choosing the smaller quantity was increased (Experiment 2) or when the visual salience of the food was reduced (Experiment 3). Experiment 4 was based on the finding that chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) that have been trained on the concept of number can solve the reversed contingency task if the food is replaced by Arabic numerals. With the help of a color association, and a higher cost incurred by picking the color associated with 3 food items, the tamarins learned to pick the color associated with... (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)  相似文献   

设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号