Advertisement

Animal Cognition

, Volume 7, Issue 4, pp 255–262 | Cite as

Discrimination of functionally appropriate and inappropriate throwing tools by captive tufted capuchins (Cebus apella)

  • Theodore Avery Evans
  • Gregory Charles Westergaard
Original Article

Abstract

A tool-throwing task was used to test whether capuchin monkeys understand the difference between functionally appropriate and functionally inappropriate tools. A group of monkeys was trained to obtain a sticky treat from a container outside their enclosure using a projectile attached to one end of an anchored line. Subsequently, these monkeys were given choice tests between functional and nonfunctional versions of tools used in training. A different feature of the tool was varied between alternatives in each choice test. The monkeys chose to use functional tools significantly more often than nonfunctional tools in early exposures to each choice test. A second experiment tested whether these subjects, as well as a second group of minimally trained participants, could distinguish between functional and nonfunctional tools that appeared different from those used in training. A new set of design features was varied between tools in these choice tests. All participants continued to choose functional tools significantly more often than nonfunctional tools, regardless of their tool-throwing experience or the novel appearance of the tools. These results suggest that capuchin monkeys, like chimpanzees studied in similar experiments, are sensitive to a variety of functionally relevant tool features.

Keywords

Tool use Cognition Capuchin Cebus 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the National Institute of Health grant no. R03HD39647-01A1 and was conducted in compliance with the laws and ethical standards of the United States of America. We thank Dr. Sue Howell for her comments on the manuscript and for her assistance with data analysis.

References

  1. Beck BB (1980) Animal tool behavior: the use and manufacture of tools by animals. Garland, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. Boesch C, Boesch H (1990) Tool use and tool making in wild chimpanzees. Folia Primatol 54:86–99PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Call J (2001) Object permanence in orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus), chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes), and children (Homo sapiens). J Comp Psychol 115:159–171CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Chappell J, Kacelnik A (2002) Tool selectivity in a non-primate, the New Caledonian crow (Corvus moneduloides). Anim Cogn 5:71–78CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Chevalier-Skolnikoff S (1990) Tool use by wild Cebus monkeys at Santa Rosa National Park, Cost Rica. Primates 31:375–383Google Scholar
  6. Cleveland AC, Rocca AM, Wendt EL, Westergaard GC (2003) Throwing behavior and the mass distribution of stone selection in tufted capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella). Am J Primatol 61:159–172CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Fujita K, Kuroshima H, Asai S (2003) How do tufted capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) understand causality involved in tool use? J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process 29:233–242CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Hauser MD (1997) Artifactual kinds and functional design features: what a primate understands without language. Cognition 64:285–308PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Hauser MD (1998) A nonhuman primate’s expectations about object motion and destination: the importance of self-propelled movement and animacy. Dev Sci 1:31–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hauser MD, Kralik J, Botto-Mahan C (1999) Problem solving and functional design features: experiments on cotton-top tamarins, Saguinus oedipus oedipus. Anim Behav 57:565–582PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Hauser MD, Williams T, Kralik JD, Moskovitz D (2001) What guides a search for food that has disappeared? Experiments on cotton-top tamarins (Saguinus oedipus). J Comp Psychol 115:140–151CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Hauser MD, Pearson H, Seelig D (2002) Ontogeny of cotton-top tamarins, Saguinus oedipus: innate recognition of functionally relevant features. Anim Behav 64:299–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hunt GR (1996) Manufacture and use of hook-tools by New Caledonian crows. Nature 379:249–251Google Scholar
  14. Klüver H (1933) Behavior mechanisms in monkeys. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  15. Klüver H (1937) Re-examination of implement-using behavior in a cebus monkey after an interval of three years. Acta Psychol 2:347–397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kummer H (1995) Causal knowledge in animals. In: Sperber D, Premack D, Premack AJ (ed) Causal cognition, a multidisciplinary debate. Clarendon Press, Oxford, pp 26–39Google Scholar
  17. Limongelli L, Boysen ST, Visalberghi E (1995) Comprehension of cause–effect relationships in a tool-using task by common chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). J Comp Psychol 109:18–26CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Mathieu M, Bouchard MA, Granger L, Herscovitch J (1976) Piagetian object-permanence in Cebus capucinus, Lagothrica flavicauda, and Pan troglodytes. Anim Behav 24:585–588Google Scholar
  19. Parker ST, Gibson KR (1977) Object manipulation, tool use and sensorimotor intelligence as feeding adaptations in Cebus monkeys and great apes. J Hum Evol 6:623–641Google Scholar
  20. Povinelli DJ (2000) Folk physics for apes. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  21. Schino G, Spinozzi G, Berlinguer L (1990) Object concept and mental representation in Cebus apella and Macaca fascicularis. Primates 31:537–544Google Scholar
  22. Tebbich S, Taborsky M, Fessl B, Blomqvist D (2001) Do woodpecker finches acquire tool-use by social learning? Proc R Soc Lond B 268:2189–2193PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Tomasello M, Call J (1997) Primate cognition. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  24. Tomonaga M (2001) Visual search for biological motion patterns in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). Psychologia 44:46–59Google Scholar
  25. Visalberghi E, Limongelli L (1994) Lack of comprehension of cause-effect relations in tool-using capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella). J Comp Psychol 108:15–22CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Visalberghi E, Trinca L (1989) Tool use in capuchin monkeys: distinguishing between performing and understanding. Primates 30:511€“521Google Scholar
  27. Visalberghi E, Fragaszy DM, Savage-Rumbaugh S (1995) Performance in a tool-using task by common chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes), bonobos (Pan paniscus), an orangutan (Pongo pygmaeus), and capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella). J Comp Psychol 109:52–60PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Weir AAS, Chappell J, Kacelnik A (2002) Shaping of hooks in New Caledonian crows. Science 297:981CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Westergaard GC (1999) Structural analysis of tool-use by tufted capuchins (Cebus apella) and chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). Anim Cogn 2:141–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Westergaard GC, Fragaszy DM (1987) The manufacture and use of tools by capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella). J Comp Psychol 101:159–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Westergaard GC, Suomi SJ (1994) Aimed throwing of stones by tufted capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella). Hum Evol 9:323–329Google Scholar
  32. Westergaard GC, Liv C, Chavanne TJ, Suomi SJ (1998) Token-mediated tool-use by a tufted capuchin monkey (Cebus apella). Anim Cogn 1:101–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Westergaard GC, Liv C, Haynie MK, Suomi SJ (2000) A comparative study of aimed throwing by monkeys and humans. Neuropsychology 38:1511–1517CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Wood S, Moriarty KM, Gardner BT, Gardner RA (1980) Object permanence in child and chimpanzee. Anim Learn Behav 8:3–9Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Theodore Avery Evans
    • 1
  • Gregory Charles Westergaard
    • 1
  1. 1.Alpha Genesis Inc.YemasseeUSA

Personalised recommendations