Browsing by Author "Call, Josep"

Chimpanzees help conspecifics achieve their goals in instrumental situations, but neither their immediate motivation nor the evolutionary basis of their motivation is clear. In the current study, we gave chimpanzees the opportunity to instrumentally help a conspecific to obtain food. Following recent studies with human children, we measured their pupil diameter at various points in the process. Like young children, chimpanzees’ pupil diameter decreased soon after they had helped. However, unlike children, chimpanzees’ pupils remained more dilated upon watching a third party provide the needed help instead of them. Our interpretation is that chimpanzees are motivated to help others, and the evolutionary basis is direct or indirect reciprocity, as providing help oneself sets the conditions for a payback. This is in contrast to young children whose goal is to see others being helped—by whomever—presumably because their helping is not based on reciprocity. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved)

When presented with the broken cloth problem, both human children and nonhuman great apes prefer to pull a continuous cloth over a discontinuous cloth in order to obtain a desired object resting on top. This has been interpreted as evidence that they preferentially attend to the functionally relevant cues of the task (e.g., presence or absence of a gap along the cloth). However, there is controversy regarding whether great apes’ behavior is underpinned by causal knowledge, involving abstract concepts (e.g., support, connection), or by perceptual knowledge, based on percepts (e.g., contact, continuity). We presented chimpanzees, orangutans, and 2-, 3-, and 4-year-old children with two versions of the broken cloth problem. The Real condition, made with paper strips, could be solved based on either perceptual cues or causal knowledge. The Painted condition, which looked very similar, could be solved only by attending to perceptual cues. All groups mastered the Real condition, in line with previous results. Older children (3- and 4-year-olds) performed significantly better in this condition than all other groups, but the performance of apes and children did not differ sharply, with 2-year-olds and apes obtaining similar results. In contrast, only 4-year-olds solved the Painted condition. We propose causal knowledge to explain the general good performance of apes and humans in the Real condition compared with the Painted condition. In addition, we suggest that symbolic knowledge might account for 4-year-olds’ performance in the Painted condition. Our findings add to the growing literature supporting the idea that learning from arbitrary cues is not a good explanation for the performance of apes and humans on some kinds of physical task.