Inference by exclusion in lion-tailed macaques (Macaca silenus), a hamadryas baboon (Papio hamadryas), capuchins (Sapajus apella), and squirrel monkeys (Saimiri sciureus).

Marsh, Heidi L.; Vining, Alexander Q.; Levendoski, Emma K.; Judge, Peter G.

doi:10.1037/a0039316

Cited by 34 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Subjects and housing Subjects were seven brown capuchin monkeys (Cebus [Sapajus] apella; five females; mean age 8.43 + 3.51 years) and six squirrel monkeys (Saimiri sciureus; six females; mean age 10.17 + 3.49 years) housed in social colonies at Bucknell University. All subjects had extensive experience with manual cognitive testing (e.g., Judge & Bruno, 2012;Judge, Evans, Schroepfer, & Gross, 2011;Kurdziel & Judge, 2007;Marsh, Vining, Levendoski, & Judge, 2015;Zander & Judge, 2015) but not with quantity discrimination specifically. All subjects were tested alone in their home cage by temporarily closing off small sections of the housing area.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of stimulus format and reward value on quantity discrimination in capuchin and squirrel monkeys

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Quantity discrimination abilities are seen in a diverse range of species with similarities in performance patterns, suggesting common underlying cognitive mechanisms. However, methodological factors that impact performance make it difficult to draw broad phylogenetic comparisons of numerical cognition across studies. For example, some Old World monkeys selected a higher quantity stimulus more frequently when choosing between inedible (pebbles) than edible (food) stimuli. In Experiment 1 we presented brown capuchin (Cebus [Sapajus] paella) and squirrel monkeys (Saimiri sciureus) with the same two-choice quantity discrimination task in three different stimulus conditions: edible, inedible, and edible replaced (in which choice stimuli were food items that stood in for the same quantity of food items that were given as a reward). Unlike Old World monkeys, capuchins selected the higher quantity stimulus more in the edible condition and squirrel monkeys showed generally poor performance across all stimulus types. Performance patterns suggested that differences in subjective reward value might motivate differences in choice behavior between and within species. In Experiment 2 we manipulated the subjective reinforcement value of the reward by varying reward type and delay to reinforcement and found that delay to reinforcement had no impact on choice behavior, while increasing the value of the reward significantly improved performance by both species. The results of this study indicate that species presented with identical tasks may respond differently to methodological factors such as stimulus and reward types, resulting in significant differences in choice behavior that may lead to spurious suggestions of species differences in cognitive abilities.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of stimulus format and reward value on quantity discrimination in capuchin and squirrel monkeys

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…If choice by exclusion is not language specific but rather is a general cognitive mechanism, it may be shared by other closely related species. Consistent with this hypothesis, nonhuman animals such as chimpanzees, dogs, monkeys, birds, and sea lions can make choices by exclusion, selecting an unknown item from among known incorrect items (Beran, 2010;Kaminski et al, 2004;Kastak & Schusterman, 2002;Marsh, Vining, Levendoski, & Judge, 2015;Pilley & Reid, 2011;Schloegl, Dierks, et al, 2009;Tomonaga, 1993). However, few studies have tested whether nonhuman animals learn from these choices.…”

mentioning

confidence: 86%

Monkeys choose, but do not learn, through exclusion

Gazes¹,

Chee²,

Hampton³

2018

AB&C

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-Human children will select a novel object from among a group of known objects when presented with a novel object name. This disambiguation by exclusion may facilitate new name-object mappings and may play a role in the rapid word learning shown by young children. Animals including dogs, apes, monkeys, and birds make similar exclusion choices. However, evidence regarding whether children and nonhuman animals learn new associations through choice by exclusion is mixed. In the present study, we dissociate choice by exclusion from learning by exclusion in rhesus monkeys using a paired-associate task. In Experiment 1, monkeys demonstrated choice by exclusion by choosing a novel comparison image from among known comparison images when presented with a novel sample image. In Experiment 2, monkeys showed little if any benefit from choice by exclusion in learning new sets of paired associates. Monkeys were trained with new sets of four paired associates by trial and error alone or by a combination of exclusion and trial and error. Despite choosing correctly by exclusion on almost 100% of opportunities, monkeys did not learn any faster by exclusion than by trial and error alone. These results indicate that monkeys choose, but do not learn, through exclusion, highlighting the importance of separately evaluating choice and learning in studies of the role of exclusion in word learning.

show abstract

“…Among others, it has been suggested that increased searches on unseen (also referred to as 'hidden') trials, where subjects did not witness the baiting, reflect a generalized search strategy such that they will search for food if none is visible, or reach for food when its location is known (Carruthers 2008;Perner 2012). For example, on hidden trials consisting of a single opaque container and two empty, transparent containers, lion-tailed macaques and capuchins continue to look into the containers despite being able to logically infer the reward's location (Marsh 2014;Marsh et al 2015;Vining and Marsh 2015). In contrast, apes respond flexibly, looking less on trials in which they can infer the reward's location through auditory cues (i.e., the experimenter shakes the containers, such that the food can be heard inside the baited container) or by exclusion, and more when the reward is of higher value or the delay between baiting and selecting is greater (Call 2010;Call and Carpenter 2001;Marsh and MacDonald 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigating information seeking in ravens (Corvus corax)

Lambert

Osvath

2020

Anim Cogn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Measuring the responses of non-human animals to situations of uncertainty is thought to shed light on an animal's metacognitive processes; namely, whether they monitor their own knowledge states. For example, when presented with a foraging task, great apes and macaques selectively seek information about the location of a food item when they have not seen where it was hidden, compared to when they have. We presented this same information seeking task to ravens, in which a food item was hidden in one of three containers, and subjects could either watch where the food was hidden, infer its location through visual or auditory clues, or were given no information. We found that unlike several ape species and macaques, but similar to capuchin monkeys, the ravens looked inside at least one tube on every trial, but typically only once, inside the baited tube, when they had either witnessed it being baited or could visually infer the reward's location. In contrast, subjects looked more often within trials in which they had not witnessed the baiting or were provided with auditory cues about the reward's location. Several potential explanations for these ceiling levels of looking are discussed, including how it may relate to the uncertainty faced by ravens when retrieving food caches.

show abstract

Inference by exclusion in lion-tailed macaques (Macaca silenus), a hamadryas baboon (Papio hamadryas), capuchins (Sapajus apella), and squirrel monkeys (Saimiri sciureus).

Cited by 34 publications

References 38 publications

Impact of stimulus format and reward value on quantity discrimination in capuchin and squirrel monkeys

Impact of stimulus format and reward value on quantity discrimination in capuchin and squirrel monkeys

Monkeys choose, but do not learn, through exclusion

Investigating information seeking in ravens (Corvus corax)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About