Yamamoto et al. Chimpanzee Helping

Question 1

What was the aim of the study?

Answer 1

1. whether chimpanzees can understand the needs of conspecifics
2. whether chimpanzees can respond to those needs with targeted helping

Question 2

What is Theory of Mind?

Answer 2

our capacity to understand the intentions and needs of others / linked to the ability to offer targeted helping with the understanding of their goals

Question 3

What is the explanation behind conspecific animal helping?

Answer 3

• targeted/ instrumental helping

- a cog exp for social behavior where help is given based on a cog understanding of the need /situation of others

Question 4

What is targeted helping?

Answer 4

help and care based on the cognitive appreciation of the need or situation of others

Question 5

What was the independent variable of the experiment?

Answer 5

the ability of the chimp to give targeted helping to another chimp

Question 6

What was the research method used?

Answer 6

Laboratory Experiment with Repeated Measures Design // adjacent experimental booths

Question 7

What were the two conditions of the task/ repeated measures design?

Answer 7

Can See - potential helper chimp was able to see the other’s tool use situation
Can’t see- potential helper chimp was not able to see the tool-use situation

Question 8

What was the dependent variable of the experiment?

Answer 8

targeted helping behavior

Question 9

How was the DV operationalized?

Answer 9

through the items offered by the participants to the conspecifics

Question 10

What items were offered?

Answer 10

correct tool (stick/straw)
incorrect non-tool (ig. string)

Question 11

How was the behavior recorded?

Answer 11

Video Camera

Question 12

What quantitative data was collective by the video camera?

Answer 12

the number of correctly targeted offers per condition

Question 13

What behavior was recorded by the vid camera?

Answer 13

1. movement
2. resp to gestures
3. where they were looking
4. how they sat in the booths

Question 14

What was the sample of the experiment?

Answer 14

5 chimps

- Primate Research Insti at Kyoto Uni

Question 15

Why were mother and child pairs used

Answer 15

bc each pair had already demonstrated frequent tool-giving interactions in prev exp and they were familiar w the tool-use tasks used in the study

Question 16

How many trials were carried out?

Answer 16

48 trials
24 straw use
24 stick use

Question 17

Describe the procedures of the experiment

Answer 17

1. 7 obj were placed in a booth where the potential helper was placed // this could only be reached by the potential helper and not the potential recipient // they could ask for it through the arm hole
2. before trial: familiarization phase
3. can see/ cannot see/ can see in the same order for each chimp

Question 18

Brief Description of the Study

Answer 18

the experiment and its tasks were designed in order to examine the ability and flexibility of chimpanzees to help a conspecific, depending on their need

Question 19

Why were the tools made inaccessible to the potential recipients?

Answer 19

so that the researchers could examine whether the potential helper was able to understand what the other chimp needed

Question 20

What was included in the familiarisation phase?

Answer 20

each day, the chimps could examine and manipulate all the objs without the need to use them as tools or offer them to others

Question 21

Describe the booth in the can-see condition?

Answer 21

panel between the two chimps were transparent

Question 22

Describe the booth in the cannot-see condition?

Answer 22

panel was opaque

Question 23

Why was the can-see condition repeated again?

Answer 23

to confirm that any diff in obj choice between the 2 two conditions was due to intentional, targeted helping and not order effect

Question 24

How does order effect affect the results of the exp?

Answer 24

the validity of the research can be lowered when the ppts are tired, bored or have figured out what they are supposed to do.

Question 25

How was order effect minimised in the study?

Answer 25

By conducting the first condition again to prevent the helping behavior being a result of repetition

Question 26

When did the trial begin?

Answer 26

when the tray of obj was presented

Question 27

when did the trial end?

Answer 27

when the recipient received the obj and obtained the juice reward/ 5 min had elapsed without an obj being passed

Question 28

when did the trial end?

Answer 28

when the recipient received the obj and obtained the juice reward/ 5 min had elapsed without an obj being passed

Question 29

How were the “offers” counted?

Answer 29

when the chimp held out the obj to the recip/ whether the recip took the obj. only first offers were considered

Question 30

How were the “offers” counted?

Answer 30

when the chimp held out the obj to the recip/ whether the recip took the obj. only first offers were considered

Question 31

What was concluded in the experiment?

Answer 31

Chimps are capable of flexible targeted helping based on an understanding of the other’s goals

1. chimps will offer help to a conspecific who requires it but usually as a resp to a direct request rather than a spontaneous act
2. chimps rely on visual confirmation of conspecifics’ needs in order to offer targeted helping

Question 32

What were the results of the 1st Can-see condition?

Answer 32

1. overall object offer from PH = 90.8%
2. object offer in the FP= 5%
3. “upon request offer” accounted for 90% of all offers
4. except Pan, the other 4 chimps offered a potential tool more freq than non-tool obj
5. 79.5% of Pan’s offers were a non-tool brush

Question 33

Why was object offer much lower in the familiarisation phase?

Answer 33

it is suggested that they were not motivated to transfer tools when there was no task available

Question 34

What does object offer refer to?

Answer 34

at least one tool (regardless of it being a tool/ non tool) was offered by the PH to the PR.

Question 35

Which results support the conclusion that direct request is imp for the onset of targeted helping in chimps in the 1st can-see condition?

Answer 35

the “upon request” offer, which accounted for 90% of all offers, shows that direct request is necessary in enabling conspecific targeted helping

Question 36

What result demonstrates that chimpanzees demonstrated flexible targeted helping depending on their partner’s predicament in the 1st can-see condition?

Answer 36

PH provided the correct tool more often when they saw that the partner needed that particular tool. Beside Pan, the avg first offer of a tool was 89.1% among the 4 chimps

Question 37

Why was the cannot-see condition used?

Answer 37

to investigate how the chimps understood which tool their partner required

Question 38

What were the names of the 5 chimps?

Answer 38

Ayumu
Cleo
Pan
Pal
Ai

Question 39

What were the results in the cannot see condition?

Answer 39

1. overall obj offer= 95.8%
2. upon req offer = 71.7%
3. slight increase in the ratio of voluntary offer from can see condition in ayumu and cleo (likely due to carryover effect/ thought she was expec to offer obj)
4. expect pan, the avg of the other 4 offering a tool in the first time was 92.83%
5. pan showed an offering of a brush (55.3% first obj offer)
6. but removing the brush, 100% first obj offer of tool
7. only ayumu provided the correct tool

Question 40

What was particular about Ayumu’s results?

Answer 40

in the cannot see condition, he was the only chimp that selected the appropriate tool. He stood up, assessed his partner’s situation by peaking through the hole before selecting and transferring the app tool.

Question 41

What is the imp of visual assessment in targeted helping?

Answer 41

Without being able to visually assess the partner’s situation, the chimps were unable to understand their goals. so, although request behavior might elicit the onset of chimp helping, it is insuff on its own for effective targeted helping.

Question 42

Why was a second can see condition used?

Answer 42

to confirm that the diff in appropriate tool selection btwen the two conditions was not due to the exp order

Question 43

What were the results of the 2nd can see condition?

Answer 43

1. overall object offer = 97.9%
2. upon request offer = 79.4%
3. offered a potential tool more freq than non-tool obj according to the situation
4. ai, cleo and pal- first offered potential tools more often than non tools