Abstract

The ability to identify an appropriate sequence of actions or to consider alternative possible action sequences might be particularly useful during problem solving in the physical domain. We developed a new ‘paddle-box’ task to test the ability of different ape species to plan an appropriate sequence of physical actions (rotating paddles) to retrieve a reward from a goal location. The task had an adjustable difficulty level and was not dependent on species-specific behaviours (e.g. complex tool use). We investigated the planning abilities of captive orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus) and bonobos (Pan paniscus) using the paddle-box. In experiment 1, subjects had to rotate one or two paddles before rotating the paddle with the reward on. Subjects of both species performed poorly, though orangutans rotated more non-food paddles, which may be related to their greater exploratory tendencies and bolder temperament compared with bonobos. In experiment 2 subjects could always rotate the paddle with the reward on first and still succeed, and most subjects of both species performed appropriate sequences of up to three paddle rotations to retrieve the reward. Poor performance in experiment 1 may have been related to subjects’ difficulty in inhibiting the prepotent response to act on the reward immediately.

Highlights

  • Planning as an everyday concept has many connotations, and several terms are used more or less interchangeably to describe a myriad of behaviours that do not seem to have much in common (Parrila et al, 1996)

  • Behaviours exhibited by wild great apes that may involve this type of planning include the use of ‘tool-sets’ for extractive foraging of honey by chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes: Brewer and McGrew, 1990); ‘engineering’ of alliances with the most profitable partners by bonobos (Pan paniscus; Aureli et al, 2008; Hohmann and Fruth, 2002); hierarchical processing of plant material by gorillas (Gorilla beringei beringei: Byrne et al, 2001) and gap-crossing in the compliant forest canopy by orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus: Chevalier-Skolnikoff et al, 1982)

  • We aimed to use the new paradigm to investigate whether captive bonobos and orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus) are able to plan an appropriate sequence of actions (a) in advance; or (b) sequentially, in order to retrieve a food reward from a goal location

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Planning as an everyday concept has many connotations, and several terms are used more or less interchangeably to describe a myriad of behaviours that do not seem to have much in common (Parrila et al, 1996). At one end of the spectrum, planning can consist of anticipating the consequences of motor actions, for example grasping an object in an appropriate orientation (end-state comfort effect; Rosenbaum et al, 1990) This has been demonstrated to develop early in humans (by 19 months of age; McCarty et al, 1999) and to have emerged early in primate phylogeny, being present in several lemur species (Chapman et al, 2010). Bearing this in mind, it is important to specify the type of planning that is of interest here, which is the type of planning that may be involved in problem solving that is oriented towards current needs. Behaviours exhibited by wild great apes that may involve this type of planning include the use of ‘tool-sets’ for extractive foraging of honey by chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes: Brewer and McGrew, 1990); ‘engineering’ of alliances with the most profitable partners by bonobos (Pan paniscus; Aureli et al, 2008; Hohmann and Fruth, 2002); hierarchical processing of plant material by gorillas (Gorilla beringei beringei: Byrne et al, 2001) and gap-crossing in the compliant forest canopy by orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus: Chevalier-Skolnikoff et al, 1982)

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call