Understanding the functional properties of tools: chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) attend to tool features differently

Sabbatini, Gloria; Truppa, Valentina; Hribar, Alenka; Gambetta, Barbara; Call, Josep; Visalberghi, Elisabetta

doi:10.1007/s10071-012-0486-x

Cited by 22 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 61 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…An ability to innovate, knowledge of object properties and observational learning has been suggested to be important [67]. All of these have been shown to correlate with slow life histories and brain encephalization [68][69][70][71].…”

Section: Experimental Evidence: Cognition and Tool Usementioning

confidence: 99%

If at first you don't succeed… Studies of ontogeny shed light on the cognitive demands of habitual tool use

Meulman

Seed

Mann

2013

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many species use tools, but the mechanisms underpinning the behaviour differ between species and even among individuals within species, depending on the variants performed. When considering tool use ‘as adaptation’, an important first step is to understand the contribution made by fixed phenotypes as compared to flexible mechanisms, for instance learning. Social learning of tool use is sometimes inferred based on variation between populations of the same species but this approach is questionable. Specifically, alternative explanations cannot be ruled out because population differences are also driven by genetic and/or environmental factors. To better understand the mechanisms underlying routine but non-universal (i.e. habitual) tool use, we suggest focusing on the ontogeny of tool use and individual variation within populations. For example, if tool-using competence emerges late during ontogeny and improves with practice or varies with exposure to social cues, then a role for learning can be inferred. Experimental studies help identify the cognitive and developmental mechanisms used when tools are used to solve problems. The mechanisms underlying the route to tool-use acquisition have important consequences for our understanding of the accumulation in technological skill complexity over the life course of an individual, across generations and over evolutionary time.

show abstract

Section: Experimental Evidence: Cognition and Tool Usementioning

confidence: 99%

If at first you don't succeed… Studies of ontogeny shed light on the cognitive demands of habitual tool use

Meulman

Seed

Mann

2013

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…What is a body-sized problem for a crow is only a forearm-sized task for an adult human. Sabbatini et al (2012) made a similar comment after analyzing the differences between chimpanzees' and capuchin monkeys' behavior on a tool-use task. Using the same-sized tools and task to study species of disparate body sizes imposes different demands on the use of the tools, independent of the animals' physical cognitions, that might produce differences in the species' behavior.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 91%

Task-specific modulation of adult humans’ tool preferences: number of choices and size of the problem

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In two experiments, we examined the effect of modifications to the features of a stick-and-tube problem on the stick lengths that adult humans used to solve the problem. In Experiment 1, we examined whether people's tool preferences for retrieving an out-of-reach object in a tube might more closely resemble those reported with laboratory crows if people could modify a single stick to an ideal length to solve the problem. Contrary to when adult humans have selected a tool from a set of ten sticks, asking people to modify a single stick to retrieve an object did not generally result in a stick whose length was related to the object's distance. Consistent with the prior research, though, the working length of the stick was related to the object's distance. In Experiment 2, we examined the effect of increasing the scale of the stick-andtube problem on people's tool preferences. Increasing the scale of the task influenced people to select relatively shorter tools than had selected in previous studies. Although the causal structures of the tasks used in the two experiments were identical, their results were not. This underscores the necessity of studying physical cognition in relation to a particular causal structure by using a variety of tasks and methods.

show abstract

“…Varying performance ascribed to different cognitive abilities between these species has been documented in some other tool-using tasks (e.g. [82,83]) and in spatial problem solving tasks (e.g. [73] although not in others e.g.…”

Section: (C) Conclusionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Percussive tool use by Taï Western chimpanzees and Fazenda Boa Vista bearded capuchin monkeys: a comparison

Visalberghi

Sirianni

Fragaszy

et al. 2015

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Percussive tool use holds special interest for scientists concerned with human origins. We summarize the findings from two field sites, Taï and Fazenda Boa Vista, where percussive tool use by chimpanzees and bearded capuchins, respectively, has been extensively investigated. We describe the ecological settings in which nut-cracking occurs and focus on four aspects of nut-cracking that have important cognitive implications, namely selection of tools, tool transport, tool modification and modulation of actions to reach the goal of cracking the nut. We comment on similarities and differences in behaviour and consider whether the observed differences reflect ecological, morphological, social and/or cognitive factors. Both species are sensitive to physical properties of tools, adjust their selection of hammers conditionally to the resistance of the nuts and to transport distance, and modulate the energy of their strikes under some conditions. However, chimpanzees transport hammers more frequently and for longer distances, take into account a higher number of combinations of variables and occasionally intentionally modify tools. A parsimonious interpretation of our findings is that morphological, ecological and social factors account for the observed differences. Confirmation of plausible cognitive differences in nut-cracking requires data not yet available.

show abstract

Understanding the functional properties of tools: chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) attend to tool features differently

Cited by 22 publications

References 61 publications

If at first you don't succeed… Studies of ontogeny shed light on the cognitive demands of habitual tool use

If at first you don't succeed… Studies of ontogeny shed light on the cognitive demands of habitual tool use

Task-specific modulation of adult humans’ tool preferences: number of choices and size of the problem

Percussive tool use by Taï Western chimpanzees and Fazenda Boa Vista bearded capuchin monkeys: a comparison

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About