The Use of Human and Conspecific Gestures By Capuchin Monkeys to Solve an Object-Choice Task

Most primates live in highly complex social systems, and therefore have evolved similarly complex methods of communicating with each other. One type of communication is the use of manual gestures, which are only found in primates. No substantial evidence exists indicating that monkeys use communicative gestures in the wild. However, monkeys may demonstrate the ability to learn and/or use gestures in certain experimental paradigms since they¿ve been shown to use other visual cues such as gaze. The purpose of this study was to investigate if ten brown capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) were able to use gestural cues from monkeys and a pointing cue from a human to obtain a hidden reward. They were then tested to determine if they could transfer this skill from monkeys to humans and from humans to monkeys. One group of monkeys was trained and tested using a conspecific as the cue giver, and was then tested with a human cue-giver. The second group of monkeys began training and testing with a human cue giver, and was then tested with a monkey cue giver. I found that two monkeys were able to use gestural cues from conspecifics (e.g., reaching) to obtain a hidden reward and then transfer this ability to a pointing cue from a human. Four monkeys learned to use the human pointing cue first, and then transferred this ability to use the gestural cues from conspecifics to obtain a hidden reward. However, the number of trials it took for each monkey to transfer the ability varied considerably. Some subjects spontaneously transferred in the minimum number of trials needed to reach my criteria for successfully obtaining hidden rewards (N = 40 trials), while others needed a large number of trials to do so (e.g. N = 190 trials). Two subjects did not perform successfully in any of the conditions in which they were tested. One subject successfully used the human pointing cue and a human pointing plus vocalization cue, but did not learn the conspecific cue. One subject learned to use the conspecific cue but not the human pointing cue. This was the first study to test if brown capuchin monkeys could use gestural cues from conspecifics to solve an object choice task. The study was also the first to test if capuchins could transfer this skill from monkeys to humans and from humans to monkeys. Results showed that capuchin monkeys were able to flexibly use communicative gestures when they were both unintentionally given by a conspecific and intentionally given by a human to indicate a source of food.

Use Of Conspecific Gestural Cues To Solve An Object-Choice Task In Tufted Capuchin Monkeys (Cebus Apella)

Capuchin monkeys, Cebus sp., utilize a wide array of gestural displays in the wild, including facial displays such as lip-smacking and bare-teeth displays. In captivity, they have been shown to respond to the head orientation of humans, show sensitivity to human attentional states, as well as follow human gazes behind barriers. In this study, I investigated whether tufted capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) would attend to and utilize the gestural cues of a conspecific to obtain a hidden reward. Two capuchins faced each other in separate compartments of an apparatus with an open field in between. The open field contained two cups with holes on one side such that only one monkey, a so-called cuing monkey, could see the reward inside one of the cups. I then moved the cups toward the other signal-receiving monkey and assessed whether it would utilize untrained cues provided by the cuing monkey to select the cup containing the reward. Two of four female capuchin monkeys learned to select the cup containing the reward significantly more often than chance. Neither of these two monkeys performed over chance spontaneously, however, and the other two monkeys never performed above chance despite many blocks of trials. Successful choices by two monkeys to obtain hidden rewards provided experimental evidence that capuchin monkeys attend to and utilize the gestural cues of conspecifics.

Melody recognition at fast and slow tempos: Effects of age, experience, and familiarity

Eighty-one listeners defined by three age ranges (18–30, 31–59, and over 60 years) and three levels of musical experience performed an immediate recognition task requiring the detection of alterations in melodies. On each trial, a brief melody was presented, followed 5 sec later by a test stimulus that either was identical to the target or had two pitches changed, for a same–different judgment. Each melody pair was presented at 0.6 note/sec, 3.0 notes/sec, or 6.0 notes/sec. Performance was better with familiar melodies than with unfamiliar melodies. Overall performance declined slightly with age and improved substantially with increasing experience, in agreement with earlier results in an identification task. Tempo affected performance on familiar tunes (moderate was best), but not on unfamiliar tunes. We discuss these results in terms of theories of dynamic attending, cognitive slowing, and working memory in aging.

The Effects of Emotions and Distraction on Attention During a Perceptual Task

According to the broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions, positive emotions broaden while negative emotions narrow thought-action repertoires. These processes reflect changes in attentional scope, which is the focus of this research. The present study tested the hypothesis that participants in negative mood would be better able to focus on a target figure and separate it from its context in a perceptual task, and would also be better able to focus on the task amid a distracting environment than participants in a positive mood. An undergraduate sample of 77 participants watched video clips selected to induce either fear or amusement, and completed an Embedded Figures Test either in a quiet setting or in a noisy setting. A higher-order ANOVA revealed that Mood had a marginally significant effect on task performance, F(1, 73) = 3.94, p = .051, and that Distraction, F(1, 72) = 4.61, p = .035 and the Mood x Distraction interaction, F(1, 73) = 9.12, p = .003 did significantly affect task performance. However, contrary to the hypothesis, the effect of the distraction manipulation was greater for participants in a negative mood than it was for participants in a positive mood. The author suggests future directions to clarify the relationship between emotions, attentional scope, and susceptibility to environmental distraction.