Literature DB >> 28877364

Are great apes able to reason from multi-item samples to populations of food items?

Johanna Eckert1,2, Hannes Rakoczy2, Josep Call1,3.   

Abstract

Inductive learning from limited observations is a cognitive capacity of fundamental importance. In humans, it is underwritten by our intuitive statistics, the ability to draw systematic inferences from populations to randomly drawn samples and vice versa. According to recent research in cognitive development, human intuitive statistics develops early in infancy. Recent work in comparative psychology has produced first evidence for analogous cognitive capacities in great apes who flexibly drew inferences from populations to samples. In the present study, we investigated whether great apes (Pongo abelii, Pan troglodytes, Pan paniscus, Gorilla gorilla) also draw inductive inferences in the opposite direction, from samples to populations. In two experiments, apes saw an experimenter randomly drawing one multi-item sample from each of two populations of food items. The populations differed in their proportion of preferred to neutral items (24:6 vs. 6:24) but apes saw only the distribution of food items in the samples that reflected the distribution of the respective populations (e.g., 4:1 vs. 1:4). Based on this observation they were then allowed to choose between the two populations. Results show that apes seemed to make inferences from samples to populations and thus chose the population from which the more favorable (4:1) sample was drawn in Experiment 1. In this experiment, the more attractive sample not only contained proportionally but also absolutely more preferred food items than the less attractive sample. Experiment 2, however, revealed that when absolute and relative frequencies were disentangled, apes performed at chance level. Whether these limitations in apes' performance reflect true limits of cognitive competence or merely performance limitations due to accessory task demands is still an open question.
© 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  comparative cognition; intuitive statistics; non-human primates; numerical cognition; probabilistic reasoning

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28877364     DOI: 10.1002/ajp.22693

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Primatol        ISSN: 0275-2565            Impact factor:   2.371


  4 in total

1.  Young children's use of probabilistic reliability and base-rates in decision-making.

Authors:  Samantha Gualtieri; Elizabeth Attisano; Stephanie Denison
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-05-25       Impact factor: 3.752

2.  Non-human primates use combined rules when deciding under ambiguity.

Authors:  A Romain; M-H Broihanne; A De Marco; B Ngoubangoye; J Call; N Rebout; V Dufour
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2021-01-11       Impact factor: 6.237

3.  Chimpanzees prioritise social information over pre-existing behaviours in a group context but not in dyads.

Authors:  Stuart K Watson; Susan P Lambeth; Steven J Schapiro; Andrew Whiten
Journal:  Anim Cogn       Date:  2018-03-24       Impact factor: 3.084

Review 4.  What animals do not do or fail to find: A novel observational approach for studying cognition in the wild.

Authors:  Karline R L Janmaat
Journal:  Evol Anthropol       Date:  2019-08-16
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.