Drawing in nonhuman primates: What we know and what remains to be investigated.

Abstract

For over a century now, a number of researchers have explored the evolutionary emergence of mark-making and drawing behaviors through studies in monkeys and apes, and particularly in chimpanzees. Their observations and results remain relevant to this day and underline the interest of this question and the questions that remain to be answered. The present review begins by retracing the historical timeline of this specific and challenging topic from the earliest anecdotal evidence to the first systematic studies in the 1930s. We then describe how the research became more empirical through the use of stimulus figures, the examination of color choices, or even exploring outline-making processes. We discuss the use of touch screens in the 1990s, which enriched our knowledge by providing an opportunity for data collection and innovative analysis. Finally, we underline several key points that are of importance for future investigations into the mark-making process in nonhuman primates.

New indices to characterize drawing behavior in humans (Homo sapiens) and chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes)

“…All chimpanzees produced more or less the same type of very angular and locomotive features with no precise forms. However, these features are not random and it is difficult to conclude to the absence of internal representation in chimpanzees 22 . This question, which has great fundamental implications, remains to be clarified through further experiments.…”

“…Moreover, such marking behavior would be difficult to differentiate from other actions such as digging or exploring surfaces. Nevertheless, it is more and more common for captive individuals to use pencils and brushes on paper sheets or even draw on tactile tablets 22 . Indeed, as Call 23 stated "testing nonhuman animals outside their 'natural' box is needed to fully probe their capabilities and limitations, something that is particularly desirable if our ultimate goal is to reconstruct the evolution of cognition" and in our case, the evolution of drawing.…”

Making drawings speak through mathematical metrics

“…In this respect, we identify three perspectives: 1) We can study the ontogeny of drawing in children and identify with precision the premises of the different steps observed during the drawing learning process (action representation, romancing and guided elicitation). 2) We can also extend the study to other species, particularly great apes, which are known to draw, and assess whether their drawing is motivated by internal representativeness 20 . 3) Finally, the method can be extended to psychopathologies such as autism 79,80 and even certain emotional disorders 21,81 , or simply be used to measure learning di culties and creativity 22,82 .…”

“…However, even if it is not always easy to demonstrate intentional pre-representational activities, we can predict without di culty that the marks produced are increasingly goal-oriented and e cient as the child progresses from scribbles to gurative drawings. Rather than studying the nished drawings, we should focus on the presence of pre-representative activities on drawing processes 10,11,13,20 .…”

I Wanna Draw Like You: Inter- and Intra-Individual Differences in Orang-utan Drawings

“…Drawing behaviour has been studied in non-human primate species including chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes), gorillas (Gorilla gorilla), orang-utans (Pongo pygmaeus), capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) and rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta) (for a review, see [1]). Nowadays, drawing is increasingly proposed as an enrichment activity for captive primates in zoological parks and research institutes.…”