Palagi, E. (2008). Sharing the motivation to play: the use of signals in adult bonobos. Anim. Behav., 75(3), 887–896.
Abstract: Gestures and facial displays are involved in regulating many aspects of mammal social life such as aggression, dominance-subordinate relationships, appeasement and play. Playful activity is an interesting behaviour for examining the role of signals as intentional communication systems. When animals play they perform patterns that are used in other serious contexts. To avoid miscommunication, many species have evolved signals to maintain a playful mood. Bonobos, Pan paniscus, with their flexible social relationships and playful propensity, may represent a good model species to test some hypotheses on adult play signalling. I analysed the potential roles of facial play expressions and solitary play in soliciting and regulating social play and found that adult bonobos used the play face (relaxed open-mouth display) in a selective manner. Play faces were more frequent during social than solitary play and, within social play, polyadic sessions (even though less frequent than dyadic sessions) were characterized by a higher frequency of signals. Following the rule of play intensity matching, play faces were more frequent when the two players matched in age and size (sessions among adults). Moreover, among dyads there was a positive correlation between the frequency of aggressive interactions performed and the frequency of play signals used, thus suggesting that signals are crucial in play negotiations among individuals showing high baseline levels of aggression. Finally, solitary play, especially when it involved pirouettes and somersaults, had an important role in triggering social play.
|
|
Palagi, E., Paoli, T., & Tarli, S. B. (2004). Reconciliation and consolation in captive bonobos (Pan paniscus). Am. J. Primatol., 62(1), 15–30.
Abstract: Although reconciliation in bonobos (Pan paniscus) has previously been described, it has not been analyzed heretofore by the postconflict (PC) match-control (MC) method. Furthermore, although reconciliation has been investigated before in this species, consolation has not. In this study we analyzed agonistic and affiliative contacts in all sex-class combinations to clarify and reevaluate the occurrence of reconciliation in bonobos via the PC-MC method. We also investigated the occurrence of consolation by analyzing the victims' triadic contact tendency (TCT), the influence of the sex of victims, and the relative occurrence of consolation and reconciliation. We collected 167 pairs of PC-MC observations in a captive group of bonobos (in Apeldoorn, The Netherlands). The conciliatory tendency (CCT) we obtained was tendentially lower than the mean value previously found for Yerkes captive chimpanzees. Close relationships, which were present in all female-female (FF) and some male-female (MF) dyads, positively affected reconciliation rates. When only adult PC-MC pairs (157) were considered, the mean TCTs and CCTs did not differ significantly. When we focused on types of PC affiliative contact, in the case of consolation we found a striking preference for sociosexual patterns. As to the relative occurrence of consolation and reconciliation, the highest level of the former was found in the absence of the latter. When reconciliation took place, consolation generally preceded it, suggesting that consolation may be a substitutive behavior. Our findings suggest that even if reconciliation remains the best option, consolation may be an alternative substitute for reconciliation that is used to buffer the tension originating from an unresolved conflict. Reconciliation and consolation are complex phenomena that are probably related to the life history of a group. Given that few studies have been conducted on this subject, we can not at this time make any generalizations regarding conflict resolution in certain species by comparing results among studies.
|
|
Vlamings, P. H. J. M., Uher, J., & Call, J. (2006). How the great apes (Pan troglodytes, Pongo pygmaeus, Pan paniscus, and Gorilla gorilla) perform on the reversed contingency task: the effects of food quantity and food visibility. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process, 32(1), 60–70.
Abstract: S. T. Boysen and G. G. Berntson (1995) found that chimpanzees performed poorly on a reversed contingency task in which they had to point to the smaller of 2 food quantities to acquire the larger quantity. The authors compared the performance of 4 great ape species (Pan troglodytes, Pongo pygmaeus, Pan paniscus, and Gorilla gorilla) on the reversed contingency task while manipulating food quantity (0-4 or 1-4) and food visibility (visible pairs or covered pairs). Results showed no systematic species differences but large individual differences. Some individuals of each species were able to solve the reversed contingency task. Both quantity and visibility of the food items had a significant effect on performance. Subjects performed better when the disparity between quantities was smaller and the quantities were not directly visible.
|
|
Call, J. (2006). Inferences by exclusion in the great apes: the effect of age and species. Anim. Cogn., 9(4), 393–403.
Abstract: This study investigated the ability of chimpanzees, gorillas, orangutans, and bonobos to make inferences by exclusion using the procedure pioneered by Premack and Premack (Cognition 50:347-362, 1994) with chimpanzees. Thirty apes were presented with two different food items (banana vs. grape) on a platform and covered with identical containers. One of the items was removed from the container and placed between the two containers so that subjects could see it. After discarding this item, subjects could select between the two containers. In Experiment 1, apes preferentially selected the container that held the item that the experimenter had not discarded, especially if subjects saw the experimenter remove the item from the container (but without seeing the container empty). Experiment 3 in which the food was removed from one of the containers behind a barrier confirmed these results. In contrast, subjects performed at chance levels when a stimulus (colored plastic chip: Exp. 1; food item: Exp. 2 and Exp. 3) designated the item that had been removed. These results indicated that apes made inferences, not just learned to use a discriminative cue to avoid the empty container. Apes perceived and treated the item discarded by the experimenter as if it were the very one that had been hidden under the container. Results suggested a positive relationship between age and inferential ability independent of memory ability but no species differences.
|
|
Kaminski, J., Call, J., & Tomasello, M. (2004). Body orientation and face orientation: two factors controlling apes' behavior from humans. Anim. Cogn., 7(4), 216–223.
Abstract: A number of animal species have evolved the cognitive ability to detect when they are being watched by other individuals. Precisely what kind of information they use to make this determination is unknown. There is particular controversy in the case of the great apes because different studies report conflicting results. In experiment 1, we presented chimpanzees, orangutans, and bonobos with a situation in which they had to request food from a human observer who was in one of various attentional states. She either stared at the ape, faced the ape with her eyes closed, sat with her back towards the ape, or left the room. In experiment 2, we systematically crossed the observer's body and face orientation so that the observer could have her body and/or face oriented either towards or away from the subject. Results indicated that apes produced more behaviors when they were being watched. They did this not only on the basis of whether they could see the experimenter as a whole, but they were sensitive to her body and face orientation separately. These results suggest that body and face orientation encode two different types of information. Whereas face orientation encodes the observer's perceptual access, body orientation encodes the observer's disposition to transfer food. In contrast to the results on body and face orientation, only two of the tested subjects responded to the state of the observer's eyes.
|
|