Animal Cognition

, Volume 20, Issue 2, pp 243–256 | Cite as

Intuitive probabilistic inference in capuchin monkeys

  • Emma C. Tecwyn
  • Stephanie Denison
  • Emily J. E. Messer
  • Daphna Buchsbaum
Original Paper

Abstract

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.

Keywords

Capuchin Intuitive statistics Numerical cognition Primate cognition Probabilistic inference Proportional reasoning 

Supplementary material

10071_2016_1043_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (156 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (PDF 155 kb)

Supplementary material 2 (MOV 15213 kb)

10071_2016_1043_MOESM3_ESM.pdf (75 kb)
Supplementary material 3 (PDF 74 kb)
10071_2016_1043_MOESM4_ESM.pdf (117 kb)
Supplementary material 4 (PDF 117 kb)

Supplementary material 5 (MOV 17637 kb)

10071_2016_1043_MOESM6_ESM.pdf (74 kb)
Supplementary material 6 (PDF 74 kb)

Supplementary material 7 (MOV 15744 kb)

Supplementary material 8 (MOV 16326 kb)

10071_2016_1043_MOESM9_ESM.pdf (72 kb)
Supplementary material 9 (PDF 71 kb)
10071_2016_1043_MOESM10_ESM.pdf (95 kb)
Supplementary material 10 (PDF 95 kb)

References

  1. Addessi E, Crescimbene L, Visalberghi E (2008) Food and token quantity discrimination in capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella). Anim Cogn 11:275–282CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 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
  3. Amici F, Aureli F, Call J (2008) Fission-fusion dynamics, behavioural flexibility, and inhibitory control in primates. Curr Biol 18:1415–1419CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 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
  5. 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
  6. Austin K, Theakston A, Lieven E, Tomasello M (2014) Young children’s understanding of denial. Devel Psychol 50(8):2061–2070CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 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
  8. 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
  9. 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
  10. Brosnan SF, de Waal FBM (2003) Monkeys reject unequal pay. Nature 425:297–299CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Brosnan SF, Schiff HC, de Waal FBM (2005) Tolerance for inequity may increase with social closeness in chimpanzees. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 272:253–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bryant P, Nunes T (2012) Children’s understanding of probability: a literature review (full report). A report to the Nuffield Foundation. Retrieved on 20 May 2015 from: http://www.nuffieldfoundation.org/sites/default/files/files/Nuffield_CuP_FULL_REPORTv_FINAL.pdf
  13. 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
  14. de Waal FBM, Leimgruber K, Greenberg AR (2008) Giving is self-rewarding for monkeys. Proc Nat Acad Sci 105:13685–13689CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. Denison S, Xu F (2010) Twelve- to 14-month-old infants can predict single-event probability with large set sizes. Dev Sci 13:798–803CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Denison S, Xu F (2014) The origins of probabilistic inference in human infants. Cognition 130:335–347CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Drucker CB, Rossa MA, Brannon EM (2016) Comparison of discrete ratios by rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta). Anim Cogn 19:57–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Evans TA, Beran MJ, Harris EH, Rice DF (2009) Quantity judgments of sequentially presented food items by capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella). Anim Cogn 12:97–105CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Falk R, Yudilevich-Assouline P, Elstein A (2012) Children’s concept of probability as inferred from their binary choices—revisited. Educ Stud Math 81:207–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fontanari L, Gonzalez M, Vallortigara G, Girotto V (2014) Probabilistic cognition in two indigenous Mayan groups. Proc Nat Acad Sci 111:17075–17080CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. Fragaszy DM, Visalberghi E, Fedigan LM (2004) The complete capuchin: the biology of the genus Cebus. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  22. Girotto V, Fontanari L, Gonzalez M, Vallortigara G, Blaye A (2016) Young children do not succeed in choice tasks that imply evaluating chances. Cognition 152:32–39CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Hanus D, Call J (2014) When maths trumps logic: probabilistic judgements in chimpanzees. Biol Lett 10:20140892CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. 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
  25. Jordan KE, Brannon EM (2006) Weber’s Law influences numerical representations in rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta). Anim Cogn 9:159–172CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 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
  27. 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
  28. MacLean EL, Hare B, Nunn CL et al (2014) The evolution of self-control. Proc Nat Acad Sci 111:E2140–E2148CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  29. Piaget J, Inhelder B (1975) The Origin of the Idea of Chance in Children. Routledge and Kegan Paul. Translation of original work (1951)Google Scholar
  30. Rakoczy H, Clüver A, Saucke L, Stoffregen N, Gräbener A, Migura J, Call J (2014) Apes are intuitive statisticians. Cognition 131:60–68CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Range F, Horn L, Zs Viranyi, Huber L (2009) Effort and reward: inequity aversion in domestic dogs? Proc Nat Acad Sci 106:340–345CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Reader SM, Hager Y, Laland KN (2011) The evolution of primate general and cultural intelligence. Phil Trans R Soc B 366:1017–1027CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  33. Reznikova Z, Ryabko B (2011) Numerical competence in animals, with an insight from ants. Behaviour 148:405–434CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Rugani R, Vallortigara G, Regolin L (2015) The use of proportion by young domestic chicks (Gallus gallus). Anim Cogn 18:605–616CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Rugani R, McCrink K, de Hevia MD, Vallortigara G, Regolin L (2016) Ratio abstraction over discrete magnitudes by newly hatched domestic chicks (Gallus gallus). Sci Rep 6:30114CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  36. Schmitt V, Fischer J (2011) Representational format determines numerical competence in monkeys. Nat Commun 2:257CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  37. Schrauf C, Huber L, Visalberghi E (2008) Do capuchin monkeys use weight to select hammer tools? Anim Cogn 11:413–422CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 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
  39. 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
  40. 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
  41. 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
  42. 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
  43. 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
  44. Xu F, Garcia V (2008) Intuitive statistics by 8-month-old infants. Proc Nat Acad Sci 105:5012–5015CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Emma C. Tecwyn
    • 1
    • 4
  • Stephanie Denison
    • 2
  • Emily J. E. Messer
    • 1
    • 5
  • Daphna Buchsbaum
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.School of Psychology and NeuroscienceUniversity of St AndrewsSt AndrewsScotland, UK
  2. 2.Department of PsychologyUniversity of WaterlooWaterlooCanada
  3. 3.Department of PsychologyUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada
  4. 4.Department of PsychologyUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada
  5. 5.Department of Psychology, School of Life SciencesHeriot-Watt UniversityEdinburghScotland, UK

Personalised recommendations