|
|
McGonigle, B. (1985). Can apes learn to count? (Vol. 315).
|
|
|
|
Mulcahy, N. J., & Call, J. (2006). Apes save tools for future use. Science, 312(5776), 1038–1040.
Abstract: Planning for future needs, not just current ones, is one of the most formidable human cognitive achievements. Whether this skill is a uniquely human adaptation is a controversial issue. In a study we conducted, bonobos and orangutans selected, transported, and saved appropriate tools above baseline levels to use them 1 hour later (experiment 1). Experiment 2 extended these results to a 14-hour delay between collecting and using the tools. Experiment 3 showed that seeing the apparatus during tool selection was not necessary to succeed. These findings suggest that the precursor skills for planning for the future evolved in great apes before 14 million years ago, when all extant great ape species shared a common ancestor.
|
|
|
|
Hare, B., Brown, M., Williamson, C., & Tomasello, M. (2002). The domestication of social cognition in dogs. Science, 298(5598), 1634–1636.
Abstract: Dogs are more skillful than great apes at a number of tasks in which they must read human communicative signals indicating the location of hidden food. In this study, we found that wolves who were raised by humans do not show these same skills, whereas domestic dog puppies only a few weeks old, even those that have had little human contact, do show these skills. These findings suggest that during the process of domestication, dogs have been selected for a set of social-cognitive abilities that enable them to communicate with humans in unique ways.
|
|
|
|
de Waal, F. B. M. (2005). How animals do business. Sci Am, 292(4), 54–61.
|
|
|
|
Whiten, A., & Boesch, C. (2001). The cultures of chimpanzees. Sci Am, 284(1), 60–67.
|
|
|
|
Pennisi, E. (1999). Are out primate cousins 'conscious'? (Vol. 284).
|
|
|
|
de Waal, F. B., Aureli, F., & Judge, P. G. (2000). Coping with crowding. Sci Am, 282(5), 76–81.
|
|
|
|
Brosnan, S. F., Schiff, H. C., & de Waal, F. B. M. (2005). Tolerance for inequity may increase with social closeness in chimpanzees. Proc Biol Sci, 272(1560), 253–258.
Abstract: Economic decision-making depends on our social environment. Humans tend to respond differently to inequity in close relationships, yet we know little about the potential for such variation in other species. We examine responses to inequity in several groups of chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) in a paradigm similar to that used previously in capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella). We demonstrate that, like capuchin monkeys, chimpanzees show a response to inequity of rewards that is based upon the partner receiving the reward rather than the presence of the reward alone. However, we also found a great amount of variation between groups tested, indicating that chimpanzees, like people, respond to inequity in a variable manner, which we speculate could be caused by such variables as group size, the social closeness of the group (as reflected in length of time that the group has been together) and group-specific traditions.
|
|
|
|
de Waal, F. B. (1995). Bonobo sex and society. Sci Am, 272(3), 82–88.
|
|
|
|
Palagi, E., Cordoni, G., & Borgognini Tarli, S. (2006). Possible roles of consolation in captive chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). Am J Phys Anthropol, 129(1), 105–111.
Abstract: Empathy is a necessary prerequisite for the occurrence of consolation. The term “consolation” contains a hypothesis about function, which is distress alleviation. The present study aims to confirm the occurrence of consolation in captive chimpanzees via the post-conflict/matched-control method (PC-MC) and to suggest its possible roles. We collected 273 PC-MC pairs in the group of Pan troglodytes housed in the ZooParc de Beauval (France). We confirmed the presence of consolatory contacts (mean level of consolation, 49.5% +/- 22.3% SEM) in the colony. Consolation rates were significantly higher than reconciliation levels (mean level of reconciliation, 28.9% +/- 16.8% SEM). The level of consolation was greater in the absence of reconciliation than in the presence of it, suggesting that consolation might be an alternative behavior. As friendship and relatedness did not influence the occurrence of consolation, they did not seem to be the best prerequisites for this behavioral mechanism, at least in this chimpanzee colony. Affinitive contacts with third parties were significantly more frequent when the victim called attention to itself during severe aggressions by screaming. These high-pitched sounds seem to be useful in eliciting aid from conspecifics, as occurs in young humans. The occurrence of consolation reduced the likelihood of further attacks among group-members. From this perspective, both victims and consolers most likely gain potential advantages by interacting with each other when aggression is particularly severe, reconciliation is not immediate, and consequently social stress reaches high levels.
|
|
