Abstract
Previous research has shown that animals possess considerable numerical abilities. However, this work was based on experiments involving extensive training, a small number of captive subjects and relatively artificial testing procedures. We present the results of experiments on over 200 semi-free-ranging rhesus monkeys using a task which involves no training and mimics a natural foraging problem. The subjects observed two experimenters place pieces of apple, one at a time, into each of two opaque containers. The experimenters then walked away so that the subjects could approach. The monkeys chose the container with the greater number of apple slices when the comparisons were one versus two, two versus three, three versus four and three versus five slices. They failed at four versus five, four versus six, four versus eight and three versus eight slices. Controls established that it was the representation of number which underlay their successful choices rather than the amount of time spent placing apple pieces into the box or the volume of apple placed in the box. The failures at values greater than three slices stand in striking contrast to other animal studies where training was involved and in which far superior numerical abilities were demonstrated. The range of success achieved by rhesus monkeys in this spontaneous-number task matches the range achieved by human infants and corresponds to the range encoded in the syntax of natural languages.
Full Text
The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (254.9 KB).
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Boysen S. T., Berntson G. G. Numerical competence in a chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes). J Comp Psychol. 1989 Mar;103(1):23–31. doi: 10.1037/0735-7036.103.1.23. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Boysen S. T., Berntson G. G. Responses to quantity: perceptual versus cognitive mechanisms in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 1995 Jan;21(1):82–86. doi: 10.1037//0097-7403.21.1.82. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Brannon E. M., Terrace H. S. Ordering of the numerosities 1 to 9 by monkeys. Science. 1998 Oct 23;282(5389):746–749. doi: 10.1126/science.282.5389.746. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Gallistel C. R., Gelman R. Preverbal and verbal counting and computation. Cognition. 1992 Aug;44(1-2):43–74. doi: 10.1016/0010-0277(92)90050-r. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hauser M. D., MacNeilage P., Ware M. Numerical representations in primates. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1996 Feb 20;93(4):1514–1517. doi: 10.1073/pnas.93.4.1514. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Matsuzawa T. Use of numbers by a chimpanzee. Nature. 1985 May 2;315(6014):57–59. doi: 10.1038/315057a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Meck W. H., Church R. M. A mode control model of counting and timing processes. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 1983 Jul;9(3):320–334. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Menzel E. W. Purposive behavior as a basis for objective communication between chimpanzees. Science. 1975 Aug 22;189(4203):652–654. doi: 10.1126/science.1162352. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Silberberg A., Fujita K. Pointing At Smaller Food Amounts In An Analogue Of Boysen And Berntson's (1995) Procedure. J Exp Anal Behav. 1996 Jul;66(1):143–147. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1996.66-143. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Simon TJ. The foundations of numerical thinking in a brain without numbers. Trends Cogn Sci. 1999 Oct;3(10):363–365. doi: 10.1016/s1364-6613(99)01383-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Trick L. M., Pylyshyn Z. W. Why are small and large numbers enumerated differently? A limited-capacity preattentive stage in vision. Psychol Rev. 1994 Jan;101(1):80–102. doi: 10.1037/0033-295x.101.1.80. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Washburn D. A., Rumbaugh D. M. Ordinal judgments of numerical symbols by macaques (Macaca mulatta). Psychol Sci. 1991 May;2(3):190–193. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.1991.tb00130.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]