A novel test of planning ability: Great apes can plan step-by-step but not in advance of action

Behavioural Processes

Volumn 100, Issue , 2013, Pages 174-184

  Tecwyn, Emma C ^a   Thorpe, Susannah K S ^a   Chappell, Jackie ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BIRMINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Bonobo; Cognition; Great ape; Inhibitory control; Orangutan; Planning; Problem solving

Indexed keywords

COGNITION; EXPERIMENTAL STUDY; HOMINID; IDENTIFICATION METHOD; INHIBITION; TOOL USE;

ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; APTITUDE; ARTICLE; COGNITION; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; MALE; NONHUMAN; ORANG UTAN; ORIENTATION; PAN PANISCUS; PLANNING; PROBLEM SOLVING; REWARD; TASK PERFORMANCE; TEMPERAMENT;

BONOBO; COGNITION; GREAT APE; INHIBITORY CONTROL; ORANGUTAN; PLANNING; PROBLEM SOLVING;

ANIMALS; FEMALE; MALE; PAN PANISCUS; PONGO PYGMAEUS; PROBLEM SOLVING; REWARD;

EID: 84886996864     PISSN: 03766357     EISSN: 18728308     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.beproc.2013.09.016     Document Type: Article

References (70)

1. Addessi E., Rossi S. Tokens improve capuchin performance in the reverse reward contingency task. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B. 2011, 278:849-854.
2. Albiach-Serrano A., Guillén-Salazar F., Call J. Mangabeys (Cercocebus torquatus lunulatus) solve the reverse contingency task without a modified procedure. Anim. Cogn. 2007, 10:387-396.
3. Albiach-Serrano A., Bugnyar T., Call J. Apes (Gorilla gorilla, Pan paniscus, P., troglodytes, Pongo abelii) versus Corvids (Corvus corax, C. corone) in a support task: the effect of pattern and functionality. J. Comp. Psychol. 2012, 126:355-367.
4. Amici F., Aureli F., Call J. Fission-fusion dynamics behavioral flexibility, and inhibitory control in primates. Curr. Biol. 2008, 18:1415-1419.
5. Amici F., Aureli F., Call J. Monkeys and apes: are their cognitive skills really so different?. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 2010, 143:188-197.
6. Aureli F., Schaffner C.M., Boesch C., Bearder S.K., Call J., Chapman C.A., Connor R., DiFiore A., Dunbar R.I.M., Henzi S.P., Holekamp K., et al. Fission-fusion dynamics new research frameworks. Curr. Anthropol. 2008, 49:627-654.
7. Barth J., Povinelli D.J., Cant J.G.H. Bodily origins of self. The Self and Memory 2004, 11-44. Psychology Press, New York. D. Beike, J. Lampinen, D. Behrend (Eds.).
8. Beran M.J. Maintenance of self-imposed delay of gratification by four chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and an orangutan (Pongo pygmaeus). J. Gen. Psychol. 2002, 129:49-66.
9. Beran M.J., Pate J.L., Washburn D.A., Rumbaugh D.M. Sequential responding and planning in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta). J. Exp. Psychol. Anim. Behav. Proc. 2004, 30:203-212.
10. Bird C.D., Emery N.J. Insightful problem solving and creative tool modification by captive nontool-using rooks. PNAS 2009, 106:10370-10375.
11. Biro D., Matsuzawa T. Numerical ordering in a chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes): planning, executing, and monitoring. J. Comp. Psychol. 1999, 113:178-185.
12. Boysen S.T., Bernston G.G., Hannan M.B., Cacioppo J.T. Quantity based interference and symbolic representations in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). J. Exp. Psychol. Anim. Behav. Proc. 1996, 22:76-86.
13. Boysen S.T., Berntson G.G. Responses to quantity: perceptual versus cognitive mechanisms in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). J. Exp. Psychol. Anim. Behav. Proc. 1995, 21:82-86.
14. Brewer S.M., McGrew W.C. Chimpanzee use of a tool-set to get honey. Folia Primatol. 1990, 54:100-104.
15. Byrne R.W., Corp N., Byrne J.M.E. Estimating the complexity of animal behaviour: how mountain gorillas eat thistles. Behaviour 2001, 138:525-557.
16. Carlson S.M., Moses L.J. Individual differences in inhibitory control and children's theory of mind. Child Dev. 2001, 72:1032-1053.
17. Chapman K.M., Weiss D.J., Rosenbaum D.A. Evolutionary roots of motor planning: the end-state comfort effect in lemurs. J. Comp. Psychol. 2010, 124:229-232.
18. Chappell J., Demery Z.P., Arriola-Rios V., Sloman A. How to build an information gathering and processing system: lessons from naturally and artificially intelligent systems. Behav. Proc. 2012, 89:179-186.
19. Chevalier-Skolnikoff S., Galdikas B.M.F., Skolnikoff A.Z. The adaptive significance of higher intelligence in wild orang-utans: a preliminary report. J. Hum. Evol. 1982, 11:639-652.
20. Crawley M. The R Book 2007, John Wiley and Sons, Ltd., Chichester.
21. DeLoache J.S., Sugarman S., Brown A.L. The development of error correction strategies in young children's manipulative play. Child Dev. 1985, 56:928-939.
22. Diamond A. Developmental time course in human infants and infant monkeys and the neural bases of, inhibitory control in reaching. Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 1990, 608:637-676.
23. Dunbar R.I.M., Mcadam M.R., Connell S.O. Mental rehearsal in great apes (Pan troglodytes and Pongo pygmaeus) and children. Behav. Proc. 2005, 69:323-330.
24. Fragaszy D., Johnson-Pynn J., Hirsh E., Brakke K. Strategic navigation of two-dimensional alley mazes: comparing capuchin monkeys and chimpanzees. Anim. Cogn. 2003, 6:149-160.
25. Fragaszy D.M., Kennedy E., Murnane A., Menzel C., Brewer G., Johnson-Pynn J., Hopkins W. Navigating two-dimensional mazes: chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and capuchins (Cebus apella sp.) profit from experience differently. Anim. Cogn. 2009, 12:491-504.
26. Grand T.I. A mechanical interpretation of terminal branch feeding. J. Mammal. 1972, 53:198-201.
27. Herrmann E., Call J. Are there geniuses amongst the apes?. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B. 2012, 367:2753-2761.
28. Herrmann E., Hare B., Cissewski J., Tomasello M. A comparison of great apes' and human childrens' temperament. Dev. Sci. 2011, 14:1393-1405.
29. Hihara S. Rapid learning of sequential tool use by macaque monkeys. Physiol. Behav. 2003, 78:427-434.
30. Hohmann G., Fruth B. Dynamics in social organization of bonobos (Pan paniscus). Behavioural Diversity in Chimpanzees Bonobos 2002, 138-150. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. C. Boesch, G. Hohmann, L.F. Marchant (Eds.).
31. Kralik J.D., Hauser M.D., Zimlicki R. The relationship between problem solving and inhibitory control: cotton-top tamarin (Saguinus oedipus) performance on a reversed contingency task. J. Comp. Psychol. 2002, 116:39-50.
32. Kuczaj S.A., Gory J.D., Xitco M.J. How intelligent are dolphins? A partial answer based on their ability to plan their behavior when confronted with novel problems. Jpn. J. Anim. Psychol. 2009, 59:99-115.
33. MacLean E.L., Matthews L.J., Hare B.A., Nunn C.L., Anderson R.C., Aureli F., Brannon E.M., Call J., Drea C.M., Emery N.J., et al. How does cognition evolve? Phylogenetic comparative psychology. Anim. Cogn. 2012, 15:223-238.
34. Mandell D.J., Sackett G.P. A computer touch screen system and training procedure for use with primate infants: results from pigtail monkeys (Macaca nemestrina). Dev. Psychobiol. 2008, 50:160-170.
35. Martin-Ordas G., Schumacher L., Call J. Sequential tool use in great apes. PLoS ONE 2012, 7:e52074.
36. McCarty M.E., Clifton R.K., Collard R.R. Problem solving in infancy: the emergence of an action plan. Dev. Psychol. 1999, 35:1091-1101.
37. Miyata H., Fujita K. Pigeons (Columba livia) plan future moves on computerized maze tasks. Anim. Cogn. 2008, 11:505-516.
38. Miyata H., Gajdon G.K., Huber L., Fujita K. How do keas (Nestor notabilis) solve artificial-fruit problems with multiple locks?. Anim. Cogn. 2011, 14:45-58.
39. Mulcahy N.J., Call J. Apes save tools for future use. Science 2006, 312:1038-1040.
40. Mulcahy N.J., Call J., Dunbar R.I.M. Gorillas (Gorilla gorilla) and orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus) encode relevant problem features in a tool-using task. J. Comp. Psychol. 2005, 119:23-32.
41. Osvath M. Spontaneous planning for future stone throwing by a male chimpanzee. Curr. Biol. 2009, 19:190-192.
42. Osvath M., Karvonen E. Spontaneous innovation for future deception in a male chimpanzee. PLoS ONE 2012, 7(5):e36782.
43. Osvath M., Osvath H. Chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes) and orangutan (Pongo abelii) forethought: self-control and pre-experience in the face of future tool use. Anim. Cogn. 2008, 11:661-674.
44. Pan J., Kennedy E.H., Pickering T., Menzel C.R., Stone B.W., Fragaszy D.M. Development of maze navigation by tufted capuchins (Cebus apella). Behav. Proc. 2011, 86:206-215.
45. Parrila R.K., Das J., Dash U.N. Development of planning and its relation to other cognitive processes. J. App. Dev. Psychol. 1996, 17:597-624.
46. Povinelli D.J., Cant J.G.H. Arboreal clambering and the evolution of self-conception. Q. Rev. Biol. 1995, 70:393-421.
47. Raby C.R., Alexis D.M., Dickinson A., Clayton N.S. Planning for the future by western scrub-jays. Nature 2007, 445:919-921.
48. Rosenbaum, D.A., Marchak, F., Barnes, H.J., Vaughan, J., Slotta, J.D., Jorgensen, M.J., 1990. Constraints for action selection: Overhand versus underhand grips. In: Jeannerod, M. (Ed.), Attention and Performance XIII. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 321-342.
49. Roth G., Dicke U. Evolution of the brain and intelligence. Trends Cogn. Sci. 2005, 9:250-257.
50. Santos L.R., Pearson H.M., Spaepen G.M., Tsao F., Hauser M.D. Probing the limits of tool competence: experiments with two non-tool-using species (Cercopithecus aethiops and Saguinus oedipus). Anim. Cogn. 2006, 9:94-109.
51. Schmitt V., Pankau B., Fischer J. Old world monkeys compare to apes in the primate cognition test battery. PLoS ONE 2012, 7:e32024.
52. Seed A., Seddon E., Greene B., Call J. Chimpanzee 'folk physics': bringing failures into focus. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 2012, 367:2743-2752.
53. Seed A.M., Call J., Emery N.J., Clayton N.S. Chimpanzees solve the trap problem when the confound of tool-use is removed. J. Exp. Psychol. Anim. Behav. Proc. 2009, 35:23-34.
54. Shumaker R.W., Palkovich A.M., Beck B.B., Guagnano G.A., Morowitz H. Spontaneous use of magnitude discrimination and ordination by the orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus). J. Comp. Psychol. 2001, 115:385-391.
55. Simpson A., Riggs K.J., Beck S.R., Gorniak S.L., Wu Y., Abbott D., Diamond A. Refining the understanding of inhibitory processes: how response prepotency is created and overcome. Dev. Sci. 2012, 15:62-73.
56. Sloman, A., 2010. Requirements for a Fully-deliberative Architecture (or component of an architecture). , COSY-DP-0604. http://www.cs.bham.ac.uk/research/projects/cosy/papers/.
57. Stevens J.R., Stephens D.W. Food sharing: a model of manipulation by harassment. Behav. Ecol. 2002, 13:393-400.
58. Suddendorf T., Corballis M.C. Mental time travel and the evolution of the human mind. Genet. Soc. Gen. Psychol. Monogr. 1997, 123:133-167.
59. Suddendorf T., Corballis M.C. The evolution of foresight: what is mental time travel, and is it unique to humans?. Behav. Brain Sci. 2007, 30:299-313.
60. Suddendorf T., Corballis M.C., Collier-Baker E. How great is great ape foresight?. Anim. Cogn. 2009, 12:751-754.
61. Taylor A., Hunt G., Holzhaider J., Gray R. Spontaneous metatool use by New Caledonian crows. Curr. Biol. 2007, 17:1504-1507.
62. Taylor A.H., Elliffe D., Hunt G.R., Gray R.D. Complex cognition and behavioural innovation in New Caledonian crows. Proc. R. Soc. B 2010, 277:2637-2643.
63. Tecwyn E.C., Thorpe S.K.S., Chappell J. What cognitive strategies do orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus) use to solve a trial-unique puzzle-tube task incorporating multiple obstacles?. Anim. Cogn. 2012, 15:121-133.
64. Thornton A., Samson J. Innovative problem solving in wild meerkats. Anim. Behav. 2012, 83:1459-1468.
65. Thorpe S.K.S., Holder R., Crompton R.H. Orangutans employ unique strategies to control branch flexibility. PNAS 2009, 106:12646-12651.
66. Uher J., Call J. How the great apes (Pan troglodytes, Pongo pygmaeus, Pan paniscus, Gorilla gorilla) perform on the reversed reward contingency task II: transfer to new quantities, long-term retention, and the impact of quantity ratios. J. Comp. Psychol. 2008, 122:204-212.
67. Visalberghi E., Limongelli L. Lack of comprehension of cause-effect relations in tool-using capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella). J. Comp. Psychol. 1994, 108:15-22.
68. Vlamings P.H.J.M., Hare B., Call J. Reaching around barriers: the performance of the great apes and 3-5-year-old children. Anim. Cogn. 2010, 13:273-285.
69. Vlamings P.H.J.M., Uher J., Call J. 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. Proc. 2006, 32:60-70.
70. Wimpenny J.H., Weir A.A.S., Clayton L., Rutz C., Kacelnik A. Cognitive processes associated with sequential tool use in New Caledonian crows. PLoS ONE 2009, 4:e6471.