Using natural ecology to predict higher cognition in human and non-human primates

Abstract

Many critical aspects of contemporary human cognitive functionality (e.g., reading, fixing a car) evolved historically in a time frame that biological natural selection cannot account for. Because of this, the best way to understand the factors that may have led to human cognition evolution is to look at cognitive processes in nonhuman primates. I argue here that comparative approaches are successful in informing us about human cognitive evolution. Furthermore, making predictions based on natural ecology will allow us to explore comparative cognition in a manner that avoids the trend to determine if non-human primates simply can do what we do. Instead, we can track different patterns of natural selection by examining how cognition differs across specific ecological niches. In this essay, I write of the excellent work applying foraging ecology to spatial memory. I then consider the ways in which metacognition has been addressed in humans and non-human primates and apply the logic of looking for differences based on ecology. Finally, I consider one paradigm that have been used to address the evolution of cognition in humans -survival processing -and discuss how it maps to non-human primates.

Non-human primates use combined rules when deciding under ambiguity

“…The current results raise the difficult question of interspecies differences and whether the latter could be explained by different cognitive toolboxes and/or different socioecology [60]. The ability of chimpanzees and orangutans to combine facts and abstractions in this study contrasts with the simplicity of the responses of bonobos and capuchins, which used simpler decision rules.…”

“…a behaviour that is very much like that of capuchins. One possibility is that responses here are not connected to their cognitive abilities but rather to the more general difficulty bonobos have dealing with risk and ambiguity in comparison to chimpanzees, which could be linked to the feeding ecology of each species [24,40,60]. However, both species exhibited similar ambiguity aversion when compared in an ambiguous gambling game where they had no information about the odds [24].…”

Primate Cognitive Studies

“…Indeed, Clayton and Dickinson (1999) showed a pattern of memory not seen in other birds that demonstrated that they could retrieve what occurred where and when that occurred. We have argued elsewhere how important it is to apply principles of foraging ecology to primate cognition (see Platt et al, 1996, for such an example;Schwartz, 2019). We also think that such principles would also be useful in studying human cognition (see Tooby & Cosmides, 2016, but also see Hampton, 2019).…”

“…In addition to the importance of balancing lab work with field work, even within studies that are exclusively lab-based (or completely field-based), it is important to consider the natural ecology of any species when considering their cognition (Schwartz, 2019). Ecological considerations as simple as whether an animal can or cannot use its fingers to press icons on a touchscreen can impact the possible outcomes for a study.…”

Comparative Approaches to the Natural Ecology of Metacognition

“…A more diverse feeder such as golden-lion tamarin (Leontopithecus rosalia) will need to search a much wider landscape to obtain food. Thus, Platt et al showed that such foraging ecology influences their cognitive strengths (see Schwartz, 2019). Similarly, Menzel and Sayers (2022) reviewed the literature on spatial cognition and how differences in the use of space by related New World monkey species predicts the monkeys' performance across a number of spatial tasks.…”