Abstract: Studies of great apes have revealed that they use manual gestures and other signals to communicate about distal objects. There is also evidence that chimpanzees modify the types of communicative signals they use depending on the attentional state of a human communicative partner. The majority of previous studies have involved chimpanzees requesting food items from a human experimenter. Here, these same communicative behaviors are reported in chimpanzees requesting a tool from a human observer. In this study, captive chimpanzees were found to gesture, vocalize, and display more often when the experimenter had a tool than when she did not. It was also found that chimpanzees responded differentially based on the attentional state of a human experimenter, and when given the wrong tool persisted in their communicative efforts. Implications for the referential and intentional nature of chimpanzee communicative signaling are discussed.

Abstract: This study investigated chimpanzees' spontaneous spatial constructions with objects and especially their ability to repeat inter-object spatial relations, which is basic to understanding spatial relations at a higher level than perception or recognition. Subjects were six chimpanzees-four chimpanzees and two bonobos-aged 6-21 years, all raised in a human environment from an early age. Only minor species differences, but considerable individual differences were found. The effect of different object samples was assessed through a comparison with a previous study. A common overall chimpanzee pattern was also found. Chimpanzees repeated different types of inter-object spatial relations such as insertion (I), or vertical (V), or next-to (H) relations. However chimpanzees repeated I or V relations with more advanced procedures than when repeating H relations. Moreover, chimpanzees never repeated combined HV relations. Compared with children, chimpanzees showed a specific difficulty in repeating H relations. Repeating H relations is crucial for representing and understanding multiple reciprocal spatial relations between detached elements and for coordinating independent positions in space. Therefore, the chimpanzees' difficulty indicates a fundamental difference in constructive space in comparison to humans. The findings are discussed in relation to issues of spatial cognition and tool use.

Abstract: Rats were exposed to a radial maze containing six black smooth arms and six wire-grid-covered arms and a striped 'exit arm' in experiment 1. The probability of a black or grid arm being baited (5/6 vs 1/6) with sunflower seeds was associated with its proximal cue for some rats (the Relevant Arm Cue group) but not for others (the Irrelevant Arm Cue group). All rats could terminate a trial and receive a highly preferred morsel of apple by entering the exit arm only after having sampled all six seed-baited arms. Relevant Arm Cue rats usually chose some arms from the more densely baited set before choosing an arm from the less densely baited set and made fewer reentries than Irrelevant Arm Cue rats. Although such clustered, higher choice accuracy in the Relevant Arm Cue group corresponds to human clustered, better recall of verbal items from lists hierarchically organized by categories, these rats did not similarly exhaustively retrieve items (arm locations). That is, when required to terminate a trial by entering the 'exit' arm for an apple morsel after having sampled all seed-baited arms, both groups were equally unable to withhold making nonrewarded premature exits. This nonexhaustive foraging search pattern was maintained in the next two experiments in which the radial maze was reduced to three black and three grid arms along with the striped 'exit' arm and in which black and grid arm cues were paired with number of seeds (eight or one) in an arm for Relevant Arm Cue rats. Although Relevant Arm Cue rats displayed perfect clustering by entering all eight-seeded arms before a one-seeded arm, they made more premature exits and reentries into eight-seeded arms in experiment 2 or when forced to enter all eight-seeded arms in experiment 3 than did Irrelevant Arm Cue rats. These foraging tendencies prevent accurate estimations of the amount of information (i.e., arm locations) rats can 'chunk'.

Abstract: This study focuses on the development of spontaneous object manipulation in three infant chimpanzees during their first 2 years of life. The three infants were raised by their biological mothers who lived among a group of chimpanzees. A human tester conducted a series of cognitive tests in a triadic situation where mothers collaborated with the researcher during the testing of the infants. Four tasks were presented, taken from normative studies of cognitive development of Japanese infants: inserting objects into corresponding holes in a box, seriating nesting cups, inserting variously shaped objects into corresponding holes in a template, and stacking up wooden blocks. The mothers had already acquired skills to perform these manipulation tasks. The infants were free to observe the mothers' manipulative behavior from immediately after birth. We focused on object-object combinations that were made spontaneously by the infant chimpanzees, without providing food reinforcement for any specific behavior that the infants performed. The three main findings can be summarized as follows. First, there was precocious appearance of object-object combination in infant chimpanzees: the age of onset (8-11 months) was comparable to that in humans (around 10 months old). Second, object-object combinations in chimpanzees remained at a low frequency between 11 and 16 months, then increased dramatically at the age of approximately 1.5 years. At the same time, the accuracy of these object-object combinations also increased. Third, chimpanzee infants showed inserting behavior frequently and from an early age but they did not exhibit stacking behavior during their first 2 years of life, in clear contrast to human data.

Abstract: We are an intensely social species--it has been argued that our social nature defines what makes us human, what makes us conscious or what gave us our large brains. As a new field, the social brain sciences are probing the neural underpinnings of social behaviour and have produced a banquet of data that are both tantalizing and deeply puzzling. We are finding new links between emotion and reason, between action and perception, and between representations of other people and ourselves. No less important are the links that are also being established across disciplines to understand social behaviour, as neuroscientists, social psychologists, anthropologists, ethologists and philosophers forge new collaborations.