The ability to reason about probabilities has ecological relevance for many species. Recent research has shown that both preverbal infants and non-human great apes can make predictions about single-item samples randomly drawn from populations by reasoning about proportions. To further explore the evolutionary origins of this ability, we conducted the first investigation of probabilistic inference in a monkey species (capuchins; Sapajus spp.). Across four experiments, capuchins (N = 19) were presented with two populations of food items that differed in their relative distribution of preferred and non-preferred items, such that one population was more likely to yield a preferred item. In each trial, capuchins had to select between hidden single-item samples randomly drawn from each population. In Experiment 1 each population was homogeneous so reasoning about proportions was not required; Experiments 2–3 replicated previous probabilistic reasoning research with infants and apes; and Experiment 4 was a novel condition untested in other species, providing an important extension to previous work. Results revealed that at least some capuchins were able to make probabilistic inferences via reasoning about proportions as opposed to simpler quantity heuristics. Performance was relatively poor in Experiment 4, so the possibility remains that capuchins may use quantity-based heuristics in some situations, though further work is required to confirm this. Interestingly, performance was not at ceiling in Experiment 1, which did not involve reasoning about proportions, but did involve sampling. This suggests that the sampling task posed demands in addition to reasoning about proportions, possibly related to inhibitory control, working memory, and/or knowledge of object permanence.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
We would like to thank the RZSS Living Links staff who gave permission to conduct research and provided invaluable support and assistance. Thanks to Keith Haynes at the University of St Andrews for constructing the cubicle window. Thanks also to Natalia Robert-Nunez for secondary coding of data.
This study was funded by an Economic and Social Research Council Future Research Leaders Grant (ES/K009540/1) to D.B.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest
Human and animal rights
All procedures were in accordance with UK law and the ASAB Guidelines for the Treatment of Animals in Behavioural Research and Teaching. The study was approved by the University of St Andrews School of Psychology and Neuroscience Ethics Committee and the Research Committee at Living Links.
Addessi E, Crescimbene L, Visalberghi E (2008) Food and token quantity discrimination in capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella). Anim Cogn 11:275–282CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Albiach-Serrano A, Call J (2014) A reversed-reward contingency task reveals causal knowledge in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). Anim Cogn 17(5):1167–1176CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Amici F, Aureli F, Call J (2008) Fission-fusion dynamics, behavioural flexibility, and inhibitory control in primates. Curr Biol 18:1415–1419CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Amici F, Aureli F, Call J (2010) Monkeys and apes: are their cognitive skills really so different? Am J Phys Anthropol 143:188–197CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Anderson JR, Sallaberry P, Barbier H (1995) Use of experimenter-given cues during object-choice tasks by capuchin monkeys. Anim Behav 49:201–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Austin K, Theakston A, Lieven E, Tomasello M (2014) Young children’s understanding of denial. Devel Psychol 50(8):2061–2070CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beran MJ, Decker S, Schwartz A, Schultz N (2011) Monkeys (Macaca mulatta and Cebus apella) and human adults and children (Homo sapiens) compare subsets of moving stimuli based on numerosity. Front Psychol 2:61CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
Bolen RH, Green SM (1997) Use of olfactory cues in foraging by owl monkeys (Aotus nancymai) and capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella). J Comp Psychol 111:152–158CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Bräuer J, Kaminski J, Riedel J, Call J, Tomasello M (2006) Making inferences about the location of hidden food: social dog, causal ape. J Comp Psychol 120:38–47CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Cronin KA, Snowdon CT (2008) The effects of unequal reward distributions on cooperative problem solving by cotton-top tamarins (Saguinus oedipus). Anim Behav 75:245–257CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
Hopkins WD, Russell JL, McIntyre J, Leavens DL (2013) Are chimpanzees really so poor at understanding imperative pointing? Some new data and an alternative view of canine and ape social cognition. PLoS ONE 8(11):379338Google Scholar
Jordan KE, Brannon EM (2006) Weber’s Law influences numerical representations in rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta). Anim Cogn 9:159–172CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Judge PG, Evans TA, Vyas DK (2005) Ordinal representation of numeric quantities by brown capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella). J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process 31:79–94CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Leonardi R, Buchanan-Smith HM, Dufour V, MacDonald C, Whiten A (2010) Living together: behaviour and welfare in single and mixed species groups of capuchin (Cebus apella) and squirrel monkeys (Saimiri sciureus). Am J Primatol 72:33–47CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Schrauf C, Huber L, Visalberghi E (2008) Do capuchin monkeys use weight to select hammer tools? Anim Cogn 11:413–422CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Tauzin T, Csík A, Kis A, Topál J (2015) What or where? The meaning of referential human pointing for dogs (Canis familiaris). J Comp Psychol 129(4):334CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Teglas E, Girotto V, Gonzalez M, Bonatti LL (2007) Intuitions of probabilities shape expectations about the future at 12 months and beyond. Proc Nat Acad Sci 104:19156–19159CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
Teglas E, Vul E, Girotto V, Gonzalez M, Tenenbaum JB, Bonatti LL (2011) Pure reasoning in 12-month-old infants as probabilistic inference. Science 332:1054–1058CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Vallortigara G (2014) Foundations of number and space representations in non-human species. In: Geary DC, Bearch DB, Mann Koepke K (eds) Evolutionary origins and early development of number processing. Elsevier, New York, pp 35–66Google Scholar
VanMarle K, Aw J, Mccrink K, Santos LR (2006) How capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) quantify objects and substances. J Comp Psychol 120:416–426CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Wilson ML, Hauser MD, Wrangham RW (2001) Does participation in intergroup conflict depend on numerical assessment, range location, or rank for wild chimpanzees? Anim Behav 6:1203–1216CrossRefGoogle Scholar