Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Strategic navigation of two-dimensional alley mazes: comparing capuchin monkeys and chimpanzees

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Animal Cognition Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract.

Planning is an important component of cognition that contributes, for example, to efficient movement through space. In the current study we presented novel two-dimensional alley mazes to four chimpanzees and three capuchin monkeys to identify the nature and efficiency of planning in relation to varying task parameters. All the subjects solved more mazes without error than expected by chance, providing compelling evidence that both species planned their choices in some manner. The probability of making a correct choice on mazes designed to be more demanding and presented later in the testing series was higher than on earlier, simpler mazes (chimpanzees), or unchanged (capuchin monkeys), suggesting microdevelopment of strategic choice. Structural properties of the mazes affected both species' choices. Capuchin monkeys were less likely than chimpanzees to take a correct path that initially led away from the goal but that eventually led to the goal. Chimpanzees were more likely to make an error by passing a correct path than by turning onto a wrong path. Chimpanzees and one capuchin made more errors on choices farther in sequence from the goal. Each species corrected errors before running into the end of an alley in approximately 40% of cases. Together, these findings suggest nascent planning abilities in each species, and the prospect for significant development of strategic planning capabilities on tasks presenting multiple simultaneous or sequential spatial relations. The computerized maze paradigm appears well suited to investigate movement planning and spatial perception in human and nonhuman primates alike.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1A–C.
Fig. 2A, B.
Fig. 3.
Fig. 4.
Fig. 5.
Fig. 6.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anderson JR (1996) Chimpanzees and capuchin monkeys: comparative cognition. In: Russon A, Bard K, Parker S (eds) Reaching into thought. The minds of great apes. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 23–56

  • Ballard D, Hayhoe M, Pook P, Rao R (1997) Deictic codes for the embodiment of cognition. Behav Brain Sci 20:723–767

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Beran MJ, Pate J, Washburn D, Rumbaugh DM (2001) Sequential responding and planning in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta). Poster presented at the 24th Annual Meeting, American Society of Primatology, Savannah, Ga.

  • Bidell TR, Fischer KW (1994) Developmental transitions in children's early on-line planning. In: Haith MM, Benson JB, Roberts RJ Jr, Pennington BF (eds) The development of future-oriented processes. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 141–176

  • Biro D, Matsuzawa T (2001) Chimpanzee numerical competence: cardinal and ordinal skills. In: Matsuzawa T (ed) Primate origins of human cognition and behavior. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg Tokyo, pp 199–225

  • Boysen ST, Halberg KI (2000) Primate numerical competence: contributions toward understanding nonhuman cognition. Cogn Sci 24:423–443

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Case R, Okamoto Y (1996) The role of central conceptual structures in the development of children's thought. Monogr Soc Res Child Dev 61(1–2):1–265

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Davis RT, Leary RW (1968) Learning of detour problems by lemurs and seven species of monkeys. Percept Mot Skills 27:1031–1034

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeLillo C, Visalberghi E, Aversano M (1997) The organization of exhaustive searches in a patchy space by capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella). J Comp Psychol 111:82–90

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fabricius WV (1988) The development of forward search planning in preschoolers. Child Dev 59:1473–1488

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Filion CM, Johnson JS, Fragaszy DM, Johnson R (1994) Studying cognition in tufted capuchins (Cebus apella) using a video-formatted testing paradigm. In: Roeder J, Thierry B, Anderson J, Herrenschmidt N (eds) Current primatology, vol II. Social development, learning, and behavior. Universite Louis Pasteur, Strasbourg, pp 111–117

  • Friedman SL, Scholnick EK (1997) The developmental psychology of planning: why, how, and when do we plan? Erlbaum, Mahwah, N.J.

  • Friedman SL, Scholnick EK, Cocking RR (1987) Blueprints for thinking: the role of planning in cognitive development. Cambridge University Press, New York

  • Gallistel C, Cramer A (1996) Computations on metric maps in mammals: getting oriented and choosing a multi-destination route. J Exp Biol 199:211–217

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Haith MM, Benson JB, Roberts RJ Jr, Pennington BF (eds) (1994) The development of future-oriented processes. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

  • Inoue-Nakamura N, Matsuzawa T (1997) Development of stone tool-use by wild chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). J Comp Psychol 111:159–173

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Janson CH (1998) Experimental evidence for spatial memory in wild brown capuchins. Anim Behav 55:1129–1143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson-Pynn J, Fragaszy DM (2001) Do apes and monkeys rely on conceptual reversibility? A review of studies using seriated nesting cups in children and nonhuman primates. Anim Cogn 4:315–324

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson-Pynn J, Fragaszy DM, Hirsh EM, Brakke KE, Greenfield PM (1999) Strategies used to combine seriated cups by chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes), bonobos (Pan paniscus), and capuchins (Cebus apella). J Comp Psychol 113:137–148

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kawai N, Matsuzawa T (2000) Cognition: numerical memory span in a chimpanzee. Nature 403:39–40

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kinzey WG (1997) New world primates: ecology, evolution, and behavior. Aldine de Gruyter, New York

  • Klahr D (1994) Discovering the present by predicting the future. In: Haith MM, Benson JB, Roberts RJ Jr, Penningon BF (eds) The development of future-oriented processes. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 177–218

  • Kuhlmeier VA, Boysen ST, Mukobi KL (1999) Scale-model comprehension by chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). J Comp Psychol 113:396–402

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lethmate J (1977) Problem-solving behavior in orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus). Fortschr Verhalt 19:169

    Google Scholar 

  • Lockman J (2000) A perception-action perspective on tool use development. Child Dev 71:137–144

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McGonigle B, Chalmers M, Dickinson A (2002) Nine-item classification and seriation in cyber-space by Cebus apella. Anim Cogn (in press)

  • McGrew WC (1992) Chimpanzee material culture: implications for human evolution. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

  • Menzel CR, Savage-Rumbaugh ES, Menzel EW Jr (1999) Organization of movement by rhesus monkeys, apes, and humans in computer-presented maze tasks. Am J Primatol 49:80

    Google Scholar 

  • Menzel EW Jr (1973) Chimpanzee spatial memory organization. Science 182:943–945

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Richardson WK, Washburn D, Hopkins W, Savage-Rumbaugh E, Rumbaugh D (1990) The NASA/LRC computerized test system. Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput 22:127–131

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts JR Jr, Ondrejko M (1994) Perception, action, and skill. In: Haith MM, Benson JB, Roberts JR Jr, Pennington BF (eds) The development of future-oriented processes. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 87–117

  • Rogoff B, Baker-Sennett J, Matusov E (1994) Considering the concept of planning. In: Haith MM, Benson JB, Roberts JR Jr, Pennington BF (eds) The development of future-oriented processes. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 353–373

  • Rumbaugh DM, Hopkins WD, Washburn DA, Savage-Rumbaugh ES (1993) Chimpanzee competence for counting in a video-formatted task situation. In: Roitblat HL, Herman LM, Nachtigall PE (eds) Language and communication: comparative perspectives. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, N.J., pp 329–346

  • Siegler P (1998) Children's thinking, 3rd edn. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, N.J.

  • Visalberghi E (1997) Success and understanding in cognitive tasks: a comparison between Cebus apella and Pan troglodytes. Int J Primatol 18:811–830

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Visalberghi E, McGrew WC (1997) Cebus meets Pan. Int J Primatol 18:677–681

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Washburn DA (1992) Analyzing the path of responding in maze-solving and other tasks. Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput 24:248–252

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Washburn DA, Astur R (2002) Exploration of virtual mazes by rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta). Anim Cogn (in press)

  • Whitecraft RA, Cobb HV, Davis RT (1959) Supplementary report: solution of bent wire detour problems by preschool children. Psychol Rep 5:609–611

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Willats P (1989) Development of problem-solving in infancy. In: Slater A, Bremmer G (eds) Infant development. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, N.J., pp 143–182

Download references

Acknowledgements.

We thank Li Jianrong and Jaxx Reeves of the Department of Statistics, University of Georgia, for initiating us into the community of generalized linear modelers, James Fuller for programming the maze tasks, SiGui Li and Nadine Schroeder for assistance with statistical analysis, Ron Davis and members of the UGA Instrument Shop for superb craftsmanship in fabrication of our test stations, Charles Menzel and Sarah Cummins-Sebree for many fruitful discussions about mazes, David Washburn for excellent advice about all things relating to joysticks, John Kelley for assistance in testing the chimpanzees, Karen Parnell for scoring assistance, and Christine Filion Orman for continuing collegial help while these data were collected and afterward. This work was supported by Grants HD06016 and HD38051 from the National Institutes of Health (USA) to Georgia State University. Studies were conducted at the University of Georgia and Georgia State University and complied with the laws regulating animal care and use in the United States.

Author information

Author notes

  1. J. Johnson-Pynn

    Present address: Department of Psychology, Berry College, 30149, Mount Berry, GA, USA

  2. E. Hirsh

    Present address: Department of Anthropology, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, 08901, New Brunswick, NJ, USA

  3. K. Brakke

    Present address: Department of Psychology, Spelman College, 30314, Atlanta, GA, USA

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, University of Georgia, 30602, Athens, GA, USA

    D. Fragaszy, J. Johnson-Pynn & E. Hirsh

  2. Language Research Center, Georgia State University, 30303, Atlanta, GA, USA

    K. Brakke

Authors
  1. D. Fragaszy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. J. Johnson-Pynn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. E. Hirsh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. K. Brakke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to D. Fragaszy.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Fragaszy, D., Johnson-Pynn, J., Hirsh, E. et al. Strategic navigation of two-dimensional alley mazes: comparing capuchin monkeys and chimpanzees. Anim Cogn 6, 149–160 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-002-0137-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-002-0137-8

Keywords.

Search

Navigation