| Records |
| Author |
de Waal, F.B.M. |
| Title |
Darwin's legacy and the study of primate visual communication |
Type |
Journal Article |
| Year |
2003 |
Publication |
Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences |
Abbreviated Journal |
Ann N Y Acad Sci |
| Volume |
1000 |
Issue |
|
Pages |
7-31 |
| Keywords |
Affect; Aggression/psychology; Animals; Culture; *Evolution; *Facial Expression; Gestures; Grooming; Humans; Laughter; *Nonverbal Communication; Primates/*physiology; Smiling; *Visual Perception |
| Abstract |
After Charles Darwin's The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals, published in 1872, we had to wait 60 years before the theme of animal expressions was picked up by another astute observer. In 1935, Nadezhda Ladygina-Kohts published a detailed comparison of the expressive behavior of a juvenile chimpanzee and of her own child. After Kohts, we had to wait until the 1960s for modern ethological analyses of primate facial and gestural communication. Again, the focus was on the chimpanzee, but ethograms on other primates appeared as well. Our understanding of the range of expressions in other primates is at present far more advanced than that in Darwin's time. A strong social component has been added: instead of focusing on the expressions per se, they are now often classified according to the social situations in which they typically occur. Initially, quantitative analyses were sequential (i.e., concerned with temporal associations between behavior patterns), and they avoided the language of emotions. I will discuss some of this early work, including my own on the communicative repertoire of the bonobo, a close relative of the chimpanzee (and ourselves). I will provide concrete examples to make the point that there is a much richer matrix of contexts possible than the common behavioral categories of aggression, sex, fear, play, and so on. Primate signaling is a form of negotiation, and previous classifications have ignored the specifics of what animals try to achieve with their exchanges. There is also increasing evidence for signal conventionalization in primates, especially the apes, in both captivity and the field. This process results in group-specific or “cultural” communication patterns. |
| Address |
Yerkes Primate Center, and Psychology Department, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia 30322, USA. dewaal@emory.edu |
| Corporate Author |
|
Thesis |
|
| Publisher |
|
Place of Publication |
|
Editor |
|
| Language |
English |
Summary Language |
|
Original Title |
|
| Series Editor |
|
Series Title |
|
Abbreviated Series Title |
|
| Series Volume |
|
Series Issue |
|
Edition |
|
| ISSN |
0077-8923 |
ISBN |
|
Medium |
|
| Area |
|
Expedition |
|
Conference |
|
| Notes |
PMID:14766618 |
Approved |
no |
Call Number  |
refbase @ user @ |
Serial |
177 |
| Permanent link to this record |
| |
|
| |
| Author |
Parr, L.A.; Winslow, J.T.; Hopkins, W.D.; de Waal, F.B. |
| Title |
Recognizing facial cues: individual discrimination by chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta) |
Type |
Journal Article |
| Year |
2000 |
Publication |
Journal of comparative psychology (Washington, D.C. : 1983) |
Abbreviated Journal |
J Comp Psychol |
| Volume |
114 |
Issue |
1 |
Pages |
47-60 |
| Keywords |
Animals; *Discrimination Learning; *Facial Expression; Female; Macaca mulatta/*psychology; Male; Mental Recall; Pan troglodytes/*psychology; Perceptual Masking; *Social Perception; Species Specificity |
| Abstract |
Faces are one of the most salient classes of stimuli involved in social communication. Three experiments compared face-recognition abilities in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta). In the face-matching task, the chimpanzees matched identical photographs of conspecifics' faces on Trial 1, and the rhesus monkeys did the same after 4 generalization trials. In the individual-recognition task, the chimpanzees matched 2 different photographs of the same individual after 2 trials, and the rhesus monkeys generalized in fewer than 6 trials. The feature-masking task showed that the eyes were the most important cue for individual recognition. Thus, chimpanzees and rhesus monkeys are able to use facial cues to discriminate unfamiliar conspecifics. Although the rhesus monkeys required many trials to learn the tasks, this is not evidence that faces are not as important social stimuli for them as for the chimpanzees. |
| Address |
Department of Psychology, Emory University. parr@rmy.emory.edu |
| Corporate Author |
|
Thesis |
|
| Publisher |
|
Place of Publication |
|
Editor |
|
| Language |
English |
Summary Language |
|
Original Title |
|
| Series Editor |
|
Series Title |
|
Abbreviated Series Title |
|
| Series Volume |
|
Series Issue |
|
Edition |
|
| ISSN |
0735-7036 |
ISBN |
|
Medium |
|
| Area |
|
Expedition |
|
Conference |
|
| Notes |
PMID:10739311 |
Approved |
no |
| Call Number |
refbase @ user @ |
Serial |
191 |
| Permanent link to this record |
