Scale-model comprehension by chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes).

Kuhlmeier, Valerie A.; Boysen, Sarah T.; Mukobi, Kimberly L.

doi:10.1037/0735-7036.113.4.396

Cited by 47 publications

(53 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We also found a main effect of language (F (1,44) ϭ 65.48, P Ͻ 0.001; Dutch: M ϭ 76.58, SD ϭ 8.1; Haiʈom: M ϭ 50.37, SD ϭ 14.4). Dutch participants outperformed Namibian participants, most likely because of more advanced formal schooling.…”

Section: Part 1: Cross-cultural Variationmentioning

confidence: 54%

“…However, none of these experiments, with infant or animal, used a strictly relational paradigm. Because prior research suggests that at least 4-year olds (11) and chimpanzees (44,45) can process relational information, we set out, in experiments 2 and 3, to determine whether there is a background preference for egocentric or allocentric coding of spatial relations through all great ape genera to see whether they share a cognitive ''wild type'' inherited from a common ancestor. Experiment 2.…”

Section: Part 2: Phylogenetic Inheritancementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Cognitive cladistics and cultural override in Hominid spatial cognition

Haun

Rapold

Call

et al. 2006

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

181

148

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Current approaches to human cognition often take a strong nativist stance based on Western adult performance, backed up where possible by neonate and infant research and almost never by comparative research across the Hominidae. Recent research suggests considerable cross-cultural differences in cognitive strategies, including relational thinking, a domain where infant research is impossible because of lack of cognitive maturation. Here, we apply the same paradigm across children and adults of different cultures and across all nonhuman great ape genera. We find that both child and adult spatial cognition systematically varies with language and culture but that, nevertheless, there is a clear inherited bias for one spatial strategy in the great apes. It is reasonable to conclude, we argue, that language and culture mask the native tendencies in our species. This cladistic approach suggests that the correct perspective on human cognition is neither nativist uniformitarian nor ''blank slate'' but recognizes the powerful impact that language and culture can have on our shared primate cognitive biases. cognitive evolution ͉ cultural differences ͉ great apes

show abstract

Section: Part 1: Cross-cultural Variationmentioning

confidence: 54%

Section: Part 2: Phylogenetic Inheritancementioning

confidence: 99%

Cognitive cladistics and cultural override in Hominid spatial cognition

Haun

Rapold

Call

et al. 2006

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

181

148

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…After initial reports showed that apes [Menzel, 2001;Menzel and Kelley, 2002] and baboons [Vauclair, 1996] can use pictorial representations such as videos to solve retrieval tasks, more recent studies focused on the processes that underlie that ability. Kuhlmeier and collaborators showed that chimpanzees recognise objects and spatial correspondences between models or pictures and real situations [Kuhlmeier et al, 1999;Boysen, 2001, 2002]. Poss and Rochat [2003] showed that chimpanzees do not depend on direct processing of perceptual information or stimulus enhancement to do so.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Capuchin Monkey (Cebus apella) Uses Video to Find Food

Potì

Saporiti²

2010

IJFP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We examined the ability of capuchin monkeys to use video without immediate visual-kinaesthetic feedback as a source of information to guide their action in the 3-dimensional world. In experiment 1, 2 capuchins learned to retrieve food under 1 of 2 different objects in 1 cage after watching the experimenter hiding food under 1 of 2 replica objects while in another cage. Information space and retrieval space were thus separate. The performance criterion was 71% first correct choices in blocks of 24 trials. However, when the subjects watched prerecorded videos of the hiding events, they chose randomly. In experiment 2, we gave the capuchins further trials with video and we enhanced the object shapes by line drawings. One capuchin eventually learned to use the video clips to locate food and he generalized this learning to 2 new objects.

show abstract

“…Studies with chimpanzees have shown that some subjects are prone to using an alternative search strategy on the scale model task (Kuhlmeier & Boysen, 2001;Kuhlmeier, Boysen, & Mukobi, 1999). After witnessing the hiding event in the model, these chimpanzees simply searched the full-size space in a clockwise manner until ultimately finding the hidden item (a bottle of juice).…”

Section: This Experimentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Symbolic Insight and Inhibitory Control: Two Problems Facing Young Children on Symbolic Retrieval Tasks

Kuhlmeier¹

2005

Journal of Cognition and Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many recent studies have explored young children's ability to use information from physical representations of space to guide search within the real world. In one commonly used procedure, children are asked to find a hidden toy in a room after observing a smaller toy being hidden in the analogous location in a scale model of the room. Three-year-old children readily find the hidden toy, although children at 2.5 years often have difficulty with the task. This experiment examined the causes of 2.5-year-olds' difficultly with this symbol system by incorporating testing procedures previously used with chimpanzees. Results indicate that young children's poor performance primarily stems from a difficulty achieving symbolic insight (i.e., recognizing the model-room representational relationship) but is also strongly affected by deficits in inhibitory control.To navigate effectively within the environment, humans have created symbols to aid our memory of our surroundings and convey spatial information to others. For example, maps and scale models contain landmarks, and their spatial relations to each other, that are analogous to real space. Consequently, to understand and use a physical representation of space, one has to first recognize its representational relation to the real world. When and how children come to recognize this correspondence has been the focus of much research over the last 15

show abstract

Scale-model comprehension by chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes).

Cited by 47 publications

References 13 publications

Cognitive cladistics and cultural override in Hominid spatial cognition

Cognitive cladistics and cultural override in Hominid spatial cognition

A Capuchin Monkey (Cebus apella) Uses Video to Find Food

Symbolic Insight and Inhibitory Control: Two Problems Facing Young Children on Symbolic Retrieval Tasks

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About