Abstract: In recent years there has been a marked increase in awareness of issues involving the psychological well-being of nonhuman primates (NHPs) used in biomedical research. As a result, many facilities are starting to train primates to voluntarily cooperate with veterinary, husbandry, and research procedures, such as remaining still for blood draws or injections. Such training generally reduces the stress associated with these procedures, resulting in calmer animals and, ultimately, better research models. However, such training requires great investments in time, and there can be vast individual differences in training success. Some animals learn tasks quickly, while others make slower progress in training. In this study, we examined whether temperament, as measured by response to a novel food object, correlated with the amount of time it took to train 20 adult female rhesus macaques to perform a simple task. The monkeys were categorized as “exploratory” (i.e., inspected a novel object placed in the home cage within 10 sec), “moderate” (i.e., inspected the object within 10-180 sec), or “inhibited” (i.e., did not inspect the object within 3 min). We utilized positive reinforcement techniques to train the monkeys to touch a target (PVC pipe shaped like an elbow) hung on their cage. Temperament correlated with training success in this study (Pearson chi2=7.22, df=2, P=0.03). We easily trained over 75% of the animals that inspected the novel food (i.e., exploratory or moderate individuals) to touch the target. However, only 22% of the inhibited monkeys performed the task. By knowing which animals may not respond to conventional training methods, we may be able to develop alternate training techniques to address their specific needs. In addition, these results will allow us to screen monkeys to be assigned to research projects in which they will be trained, with the goal of obtaining the best candidates for those studies.

Abstract: Behavioral and physiological characteristics of individuals within the same species have been found to be stable across time and contexts. In this study, we investigated individual differences in learning abilities and object and social manipulation to test for consistency within individuals across different tasks. Individual ravens (Corvus corax) were tested in simple color and position discrimination tasks to establish their learning abilities. We found that males were significantly better in the acquisition of the first discrimination task and the object manipulation task, but not in any of the other tasks. Furthermore, faster learners engaged less often in manipulations of conspecifics and exploration of objects to get access to food. No relationship between object and social manipulation and reversal training were found. Our results suggest that individual differences in regard to the acquisition of new tasks may be related to personalities or at least object manipulation in ravens.

Abstract: The position advanced in this paper is that the bedrock of emotional feelings is contained within the evolved emotional action apparatus of mammalian brains. This dual-aspect monism approach to brain-mind functions, which asserts that emotional feelings may reflect the neurodynamics of brain systems that generate instinctual emotional behaviors, saves us from various conceptual conundrums. In coarse form, primary process affective consciousness seems to be fundamentally an unconditional “gift of nature” rather than an acquired skill, even though those systems facilitate skill acquisition via various felt reinforcements. Affective consciousness, being a comparatively intrinsic function of the brain, shared homologously by all mammalian species, should be the easiest variant of consciousness to study in animals. This is not to deny that some secondary processes (e.g., awareness of feelings in the generation of behavioral choices) cannot be evaluated in animals with sufficiently clever behavioral learning procedures, as with place-preference procedures and the analysis of changes in learned behaviors after one has induced re-valuation of incentives. Rather, the claim is that a direct neuroscientific study of primary process emotional/affective states is best achieved through the study of the intrinsic (“instinctual”), albeit experientially refined, emotional action tendencies of other animals. In this view, core emotional feelings may reflect the neurodynamic attractor landscapes of a variety of extended trans-diencephalic, limbic emotional action systems-including SEEKING, FEAR, RAGE, LUST, CARE, PANIC, and PLAY. Through a study of these brain systems, the neural infrastructure of human and animal affective consciousness may be revealed. Emotional feelings are instantiated in large-scale neurodynamics that can be most effectively monitored via the ethological analysis of emotional action tendencies and the accompanying brain neurochemical/electrical changes. The intrinsic coherence of such emotional responses is demonstrated by the fact that they can be provoked by electrical and chemical stimulation of specific brain zones-effects that are affectively laden. For substantive progress in this emerging research arena, animal brain researchers need to discuss affective brain functions more openly. Secondary awareness processes, because of their more conditional, contextually situated nature, are more difficult to understand in any neuroscientific detail. In other words, the information-processing brain functions, critical for cognitive consciousness, are harder to study in other animals than the more homologous emotional/motivational affective state functions of the brain.