Literature DB >> 25080368

Double invisible displacement understanding in orangutans: testing in non-locomotor and locomotor space.

Suma Mallavarapu1, Tara S Stoinski, Bonnie M Perdue, Terry L Maple.   

Abstract

The nonadjacent double invisible displacement task has been used to test for the ability of different species to mentally represent the unperceived trajectory of an object. The task typically requires three occluders/boxes in a linear array and involves hiding an object in one of two nonadjacent boxes visited in succession. Previous research indicates that 19-, 26-, and 30-month-old children and various nonhuman species cannot solve these displacements. It has been hypothesized that this is because individuals are unable to inhibit searching in the unbaited center box that was never visited by the experimenter. It has been suggested that presenting the task in a large-scale locomotor space might allow individuals to overcome this inhibition problem. In the present study, we tested orangutans on adjacent and nonadjacent double invisible displacements with the traditional setup (experiment 1) and in locomotor space with boxes placed 1.22 m apart (experiment 2). In both experiments, subjects were able to solve adjacent, but not nonadjacent, trials. The failure on nonadjacent trials appeared to be because of an inability to inhibit sequential search on the second choice as well as because of a large number of first-choice errors (directly choosing an incorrect box). The current results support previous findings that orangutans exhibit some constraints when representing the invisible trajectory of objects.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25080368     DOI: 10.1007/s10329-014-0439-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Primates        ISSN: 0032-8332            Impact factor:   2.163


  17 in total

1.  Object permanence in lemurs.

Authors:  Anja M Deppe; Patricia C Wright; William A Szelistowski
Journal:  Anim Cogn       Date:  2008-10-21       Impact factor: 3.084

2.  Use of statistical programs for nonparametric tests of small samples often leads to incorrect P values: examples fromAnimal Behaviour.

Authors: 
Journal:  Anim Behav       Date:  1998-07       Impact factor: 2.844

3.  Object permanence in orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus), chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes), and children (Homo sapiens).

Authors:  J Call
Journal:  J Comp Psychol       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 2.231

4.  Do chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) understand single invisible displacement?

Authors:  Emma Collier-Baker; Joanne M Davis; Mark Nielsen; Thomas Suddendorf
Journal:  Anim Cogn       Date:  2005-11-16       Impact factor: 3.084

5.  Do chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and 2-year-old children (Homo sapiens) understand double invisible displacement?

Authors:  Emma Collier-Baker; Thomas Suddendorf
Journal:  J Comp Psychol       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 2.231

6.  Can monkeys (Macaca mulatta) represent invisible displacement?

Authors:  C M Filion; D A Washburn; J P Gulledge
Journal:  J Comp Psychol       Date:  1996-12       Impact factor: 2.231

7.  Great apes track hidden objects after changes in the objects' position and in subject's orientation.

Authors:  Anna Albiach-Serrano; Josep Call; Jochen Barth
Journal:  Am J Primatol       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 2.371

8.  Object permanence in orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus) and squirrel monkeys (Saimiri sciureus).

Authors:  S T de Blois; M A Novak; M Bond
Journal:  J Comp Psychol       Date:  1998-06       Impact factor: 2.231

9.  What do dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) understand about hidden objects?

Authors:  Kelly Jaakkola; Emily Guarino; Mandy Rodriguez; Linda Erb; Marie Trone
Journal:  Anim Cogn       Date:  2009-06-19       Impact factor: 3.084

10.  Chimpanzee spatial memory organization.

Authors:  E W Menzel
Journal:  Science       Date:  1973-11-30       Impact factor: 47.728

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.