Mangabeys (Cercocebus torquatus lunulatus) solve the reverse contingency task without a modified procedure

Animal Cognition

Volumn 10, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 387-396

  Albiach Serrano, Anna ^a   Guillén Salazar, Federico ^a   Call, Josep ^b  

^a Cardenal Herrera University   (Spain)

^b MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR EVOLUTIONARY ANTHROPOLOGY   (Germany)

Author keywords

Inhibitory control; Monkeys; Quantity discrimination; Reverse contingency task

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; CERCOCEBUS; INHIBITION (PSYCHOLOGY); LEARNING; MALE; PROBLEM SOLVING; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT;

ANIMALS; CERCOCEBUS; INHIBITION (PSYCHOLOGY); MALE; PROBLEM SOLVING; REVERSAL LEARNING;

ANIMALIA; CERCOCEBUS; CERCOCEBUS TORQUATUS LUNULATUS; HOMINIDAE; MACACA; MACACA MULATTA; PRIMATES;

EID: 34748817485     PISSN: 14359448     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10071-007-0076-5     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Anderson JR, Awazu S, Fujita K (2000) Can squirrel monkeys (Saimiri sciureus) learn self-control? A study using food array selection tests and reversed reward contingency. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process 26:87-97
2. Anderson JR, Awazu S, Fujita K (2004) Squirrel monkeys (Saimiri sciureus) choose smaller food arrays: long-term retention, choice with nonpreferred food, and transposition. J Comp Psychol 118:58-64
3. Boysen ST, Berntson GG (1995) Responses to quantity: perceptual versus cognitive mechanisms in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process 21:82-86
4. Boysen ST, Berntson GG, Hannan MB, Cacioppo JT (1996) Quantity-based interference and symbolic representations in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process 22:76-86
5. Boysen ST, Mukobi KL, Berntson GG (1999) Overcoming response bias using symbolic representations of number by chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). Anim Learn Behav 27:229-235
6. Boysen ST, Berntson GG, Mukobi KL (2001) Size matters: impact of size and quantity on array choice by chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). J Comp Psychol 115:106-110
7. Genty E, Palmier C, Roeder JJ (2004) Learning to suppress responses to the larger of two rewards in two species of lemurs, Eulemur fulvus and E. macaco. Anim Behav 67:925-932
8. Gómez JC (1990) The emergence of intentional communication as a problem solving strategy in the gorilla. In: Parker ST, Gibson KR (eds) "Language" and intelligence in monkeys and apes: comparative developmental perspectives. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 333-355
9. Guillaume P, Meyerson I (1930) Recherches sur l'usage de l'instrument chez les singes. I. Le probleme du detour. J Psychol Normale Pathol 27:177-236
10. Hauser MD, Santos LR, Spaepen GM, Pearson HE (2002) Problem solving, inhibition and domain-specific experience: experiments on cottontop tamarins, Saguinus oedipus. Anim Behav 64:387-396
11. Köhler W (1925) The mentality of apes. Vintage Books, New York
12. Kralik JD (2005) Inhibitory control and response selection in problem solving: how cotton-top tamarins (Saguinus oedipus) overcome a bias for selecting the larger quantity of food. J Comp Psychol 119:78-89
13. Kralik JD, Hauser MD, Zimlicki R (2002) The relationship between problem solving and inhibitory control: cotton-top tamarin (Saguinus oedipus) performance on a reversed contingency task. J Comp Psychol 116:39-50
14. Murray EA, Kralik JD, Wise SP (2005) Learning to inhibit prepotent responses: successful performance by rhesus macaques, Macaca mulatta, on the reversed-contingency task. Anim Behav 69:991-998
15. Shumaker RW, Palkovitch AM, Beck BB, Guagnano GA, Morowitz H (2001) Spontaneous use of magnitude discrimination and ordination by the orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus). J Comp Psychol 15:385-391
16. Silberberg A, Fujita K (1996) Pointing at smaller food amounts in an analogue of Boysen and Berntson's (1995) procedure. J Exp Anal Behav 66:143-147
17. Vlamings PHJM, Uher J, Call J (2006) How the Great apes (Pan troglodytes, Pongo pygmaeus, Pan paniscus, and Gorilla gorilla) perform on the reversed contingency task: the effects of food quantity and food visibility. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process 32(1):60-70