Abstract: Many primates, including humans, live in complex hierarchical societies where social context and status affect daily life. Nevertheless, primate learning studies typically test single animals in limited laboratory settings where the important effects of social interactions and relationships cannot be studied. To investigate the impact of sociality on associative learning, we compared the individual performances of group-tested rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta) across various social contexts. We used a traditional discrimination paradigm that measures an animal's ability to form associations between cues and the obtaining of food in choice situations; but we adapted the task for group testing. After training a 55-member colony to separate on command into two subgroups, composed of either high- or low-status families, we exposed animals to two color discrimination problems, one with all monkeys present (combined condition), the other in their “dominant” and “subordinate” cohorts (split condition). Next, we manipulated learning history by testing animals on the same problems, but with the social contexts reversed. Monkeys from dominant families excelled in all conditions, but subordinates performed well in the split condition only, regardless of learning history. Subordinate animals had learned the associations, but expressed their knowledge only when segregated from higher-ranking animals. Because aggressive behavior was rare, performance deficits probably reflected voluntary inhibition. This experimental evidence of rank-related, social modulation of performance calls for greater consideration of social factors when assessing learning and may also have relevance for the evaluation of human scholastic achievement.

Abstract: Now more than ever animal studies have the potential to test hypotheses regarding how cognition evolves. Comparative psychologists have developed new techniques to probe the cognitive mechanisms underlying animal behavior, and they have become increasingly skillful at adapting methodologies to test multiple species. Meanwhile, evolutionary biologists have generated quantitative approaches to investigate the phylogenetic distribution and function of phenotypic traits, including cognition. In particular, phylogenetic methods can quantitatively (1) test whether specific cognitive abilities are correlated with life history (e.g., lifespan), morphology (e.g., brain size), or socio-ecological variables (e.g., social system), (2) measure how strongly phylogenetic relatedness predicts the distribution of cognitive skills across species, and (3) estimate the ancestral state of a given cognitive trait using measures of cognitive performance from extant species. Phylogenetic methods can also be used to guide the selection of species comparisons that offer the strongest tests of a priori predictions of cognitive evolutionary hypotheses (i.e., phylogenetic targeting). Here, we explain how an integration of comparative psychology and evolutionary biology will answer a host of questions regarding the phylogenetic distribution and history of cognitive traits, as well as the evolutionary processes that drove their evolution.