Lecture 3 - Do Apes have ToM?

Question 1

What are the 2 possibilities of language being unique to humans?

Answer 1

1: Chimps mind seems similar precisely because it is similar. share ability think about mental states.
2. We cannot help distorting chimps mind, recreating it in our own image.

Question 2

Outline Premack and Woodruff 1978 do chimps have ToM?

Answer 2

First individuals study this area.
Video woman stressful situations. Shown picture cards with solutions to scenarios. Successfully match. Reason about intention of human.

Question 3

Who were the first researchers to look at chimps having ToM?

Answer 3

Premack and Woodruff 1978

Question 4

Outline Woodruff and Premack 1979 study on food and ToM

Answer 4

Humans cooperated with chimp in finding goal. Chimp produce and comprehend behavioural cues. Human and chimp competed. Chimp learned withhold info or mislead recipient

Question 5

Criticism of Woodruff and Premack’s 1979 study

Answer 5

Only occurred after a lot of training.
Perhaps only learnt 2 rules. Competing = experimenter wore hat, cooperating = did not. Perhaps just learnt association with presence or absence of hat. 2 out 4 chimps successful = not easy to acquire.

Question 6

Who are the 2 camps in the debate?

Answer 6

Povinelli Camp

Tomasello Camp

Question 7

Outline the Povinelli Camp

Answer 7

Chimps do not reason about others’ beliefs or any other mental states.
Same behaviours, but not same underlying psychological mechanisms.

Question 8

Outline the Tomasello Camp

Answer 8

Chimps have ToM in some respects, but not in others.
No evidence whether they understand FB
BUT: Chimps understand goals and intentions and perception and knowledge of others.

Question 9

Outline the Behavioural Abstraction Hypothesis

Answer 9

Understand only surface-level. Form behavioural rules.
Abstract categories of behaviour
Make predictions future behaviour that follow from past behaviours and adjust their own behaviour accordingly.

Question 10

What are the Behavioural Rules of the Behavioural Abstraction Hypothesis

Answer 10

Chimps highly social animals. Need anticipate what others do.
Anticipate actions based goals and intentions.
Inferring states not only in previously observed situations, also in novel situations.

Question 11

Outline Call and Tomasello 2008 study on understanding goals and intentions?

Answer 11

summarised 10 studies. Infants and chimps show understanding goals or intentions.
Chimps leave earlier and beg more intensely from experiment who is unwilling opposed unable deliver food. Reasoning about mental states.

Question 12

What studies contradict Pavinelli’s behavioural abstraction hypothesis

Answer 12

Imitation studies

Question 13

Outline Buttelmann et al 2007 study on understanding goals and intentions

Answer 13

Demonstration human interacting with target. Either hitting it with his foot as his hands were full or with his hands empty, Chimps imitate rationally. Imitated behaviour when seemed do it intentionally not due physical constraint.
Chimps understand others goals and intentions

Question 14

Outline Warneken and Tomasello 2006 study procedure

Answer 14

altruistic motivation = no benefit/costly.
24x 18 month olds. 3x 36-54 month old chimps.
10 situations 4 categories. Out of reach, Access thwarted by physical object, Achieving wrong result, Using wrong means.
3 request phases - 10 focus, 10 alternative gazes, 10 verbalise.

Question 15

Results of Warneken and Tomasello 2006 study on altruistic motivation

Answer 15

Children and chimps both willing help without reward or praise.
6 out 10 trials more likely to help. Show difference between control and experimental. Reason between when people do and don’t need help.
Chimps helped more in reaching tasks than other tasks.
Best competitive than cooperative as in wild more competitive.

Question 16

Why does Warneken and Tomasello 2006 study contradict Povinelli’s behavioural abstraction hypothesis

Answer 16

Lot these situations novel and chimps respond appropriately.
Not just learnt rules.

Question 17

Pavinelli and Eddy 1996 - Can chimps follow gaze?

Answer 17

Chimps understand there are targets we look at it. Target cannot be what I cannot see. If there is a barrier stopping chimp seeing what human is looking at Chimp will try and look around barrier.

Question 18

Pavinelli and Preuss 1995, and Pavinelli and Eddy 1996 - Understanding perception? Negative evidence.

Answer 18

Chimps beg food from blindfolded human. Indiscriminately begged from both equally, no understanding 1 cannot see.

Question 19

Can chimps appreciate what others see?

Answer 19

Possess and learn rules about visual perception.
BUT: These rules do not necessarily incorporate notion seeing “about” something. E.g. cannot distinguish begging from blindfolded vs non-blindfolded person

Question 20

Outline Pavinelli and Eddy 1996 3 explanations for chimps perceptual understanding

Answer 20

1. General delay in psychological development in chimps
2. Chimps may possess different (mentalistic) theory of attention (focus body and face)
3. Subjective understanding visual perception may be unique to humans

Question 21

Kaminski et al 2004 positive evidence understanding perception

Answer 21

1 person sat in front chimp with food. Chimps begged more when they were being watched (facing front with eyes open). No difference eyes closed vs open. Body facing correct way but face not = begged less.
Sensitive both body and face orientation but not eyes (explain negative findings)

Question 22

Why is Kaminski et als positive evidence better than negative evidence?

Answer 22

Positive experiment: only 1 experimenter, task is easier. 2 experimenters = reduction attention. Too cognitively demanding.

Question 23

Hare, Call and Tomasello 2001 study understanding knowledge and perception: positive evidence.

Answer 23

Competitive paradigm. Alongside another chimp. Subordinate and dominate chimp. Manipulated dominate chimps perception of food being hidden. Food placed in atrium where it couldn’t be seen by dominate chimp. Subordinate chimp only went for food when dominate chimp could not see where food was hidden.

Question 24

What does Hare, Call and Tomasello 2001 study tell us about chimps understanding?

Answer 24

Chimps can reason about others’ knowledge on basis of what others have/have not seen.

Question 25

Hare et al 2006 study on understanding perception and knowledge. Positive evidence.

Answer 25

Chimps show visual and auditory perspective taking. Chimp interacting with human with food on either side her. Whether chimp go for food faced away from attending person, or in line of sight. Approaches food competitor can’t see. Thinking about face not just body - by choosing food nearer her chest than eye-sight.
Baseline preference transparent = can see food. Override this for experiment.

Question 26

Melis, Call and Tomasello 2006 auditory perspective taking study

Answer 26

Chimps preferred reach through silent rather than noisy tunnel. Consider what experimenter can hear, and their resulting behaviour.
Non-social control just likely go through loud and silent door.
Manipulate auditory perception of competitor.

Question 27

What does Call and Tomasello 2008 study tell us about behavioural abstraction hypothesis?

Answer 27

Chimps do this without past experience these situations. No rule learned.
Contradicts Pavinelli’s behavioural abstraction hypothesis.

Question 28

Outline Call and Tomasello 1999 study on understanding FB

Answer 28

Man watches as treat hidden under 1 of 2 cups, Chimp cannot see. Man leaves and cups are swapped. Man returns and points to 1 cup. Chimp has single change retrieve. Chimp scores looks under cup man didn’t point to. No apes passed. No evidence FB understanding. BUT high task demands.

Question 29

Outline Marticorena et al 2011 study test 1 on FB

Answer 29

Opportunistically sampled. Violation of expectation method. 1. Experimenter moving conveyor belt. Actor can see what is happening so have correct reality. Unexpected when she looks in wrong box. look for longer when actors fails look correct location.

Question 30

Outline Marticorena et al 2011 study test 2 on FB

Answer 30

Experimenter looked away so didn’t notice change object location. Monkey no expectations, understood she was ignorant.
Represent whether actor is knowledgeable or ignorant. But not of their own beliefs.
In contrast to 15-month olds

Question 31

Outline Krupenye et al 2016 study on FB

Answer 31

Eye-tracking. Anticipatory gaze paradigm. Anticipate where chimp/human look for object. Significant first looks higher towards target than distractor. First look = anticipating where person look.
great apes anticipate other individuals will act according to FB.

Question 32

What does Krupenye et al 2016 study on FB study tell us?

Answer 32

Competing explanation: apes used knowledge of abstract rules. Specifically that people tend look for objects in place they last saw them.

Question 33

Do apes have ToM?

Answer 33

Reports of mentalising in wild (ancedotes)
Evidence understand: goals/intentions and seeing=knowing
BUT: Failure solve FB tasks until 2016
Mixed evidence: difference competition vs cooperation
Different ways interpret results.