Abstract
Researchers have investigated to what extent non-human primates understand others’ attentional states, as this ability is considered an important prerequisite for theory of mind. However, previous studies using food requesting tasks have failed to show that non-human primates attribute perception to others as a function of their attentional states. One possible reason is that food requesting tasks may require subjects not only to take into account an experimenter’s attentional state but also to direct it toward the food. The present study tested tufted capuchin monkeys’ (Cebus apella) understanding of others’ attentional states in a food requesting task. In the first situation, monkeys were required only to attract an experimenter’s attention. In the second situation, the monkeys were required to both attract the experimenter’s attention and direct it toward food on a table. The results revealed that capuchin monkeys showed evidence of understanding the experimenter’s attentional variations only in the former condition. This suggests that previous tasks, requiring referential gestures, lacking in most non-human primates, failed to reveal sensitivity to human attentional states because the subjects might not have understood the requesting situation. In conclusion, capuchin monkeys can understand variations in others’ attentional states, although this ability appears limited compared to what is seen in humans.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Anderson JR, Sallaberry P, Barbier H (1995) Use of experimenter-given cues during object-choice tasks by capuchin monkeys. Anim Behav 49:201–208
Anderson JR, Montant M, Schmitt D (1996) Rhesus monkeys fail to use gaze direction as an experimenter-given cue in an object-choice task. Behav Process 37:47–55
Anderson JR, Kuroshima H, Kuwahata H, Fujita K (2004) Do squirrel monkeys (Saimiri sciureus) and capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) predict that looking leads to touching? Anim Cogn 7:185–192
Call J, Tomasello M (1994) Production and comprehension of referential pointing by Orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus). J Comp Psychol 108:307–317
Call J, Tomasello M (2005) What do chimpanzees know about seeing revisited: an explanation of the third kind. In: Eilan N, Hoerl C, McCormack T, Roessler J (eds) Issues in joint attention. Oxford University Press, NY, pp 45–64
Call J, Hare B, Tomasello M (1998) Chimpanzee gaze following in an object choice task. Anim Cogn 1:89–100
Call J, Agnetta B, Tomasello M (2000) Social cues that chimpanzees do and do not use to find hidden objects. Anim Cogn 3:23–34
De Waal FBM (1997) Food transfers through mesh in brown capuchin monkeys. J Comp Psychol 111:370–378
De Waal FBM (2000) Attitudinal reciprocity in food sharing among brown capuchin monkeys. Anim Behav 60:253–261
Flavell JH, Everett BA, Croft K, Flavell ER (1981) Young children’s knowledge about visual perception: further evidence for the Level 1-Level 2 distinction. Dev Psychol 17:99–103
Flombaum JI, Santos LR (2005) Rhesus monkeys attribute perception to others. Curr Biol 15:447–452
Fragaszy DM, Visalberghi E, Fedigan LM (2004) The complete capuchin: the biology of the genus Cebus. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Fujita K (2004) How do nonhuman animals perceptually integrate figural fragments? Jpn Psychol Res 46:154–169
Fujita K, Giersch A (2005) What perceptual rules do capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) follow in completing partly occluded figures? J Exp Psychol Anim Process 31:387–398
Fujita K, Kuroshima H, Masuda T (2002) Do tufted capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) spontaneously deceive opponents? A preliminary analysis of an experimental food-competition contest between monkeys. Anim Cogn 5:19–25
Fujita K, Kuroshoma H, Asai S (2003) How do tufted capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) understand causality involved in tool use? J Exp Psychol Anim Process 29:233–242
Gomez JC (2005) Requesting gestures in captive monkeys and apes: conditioned responses or referential behaviors? Gesture 5:91–105
Hare B, Call J, Agnetta B, Tomasello M (2000) Chimpanzees know what conspecifics do and do not see. Anim Behav 59:771–785
Hare B, Call J, Tomasello M (2001) Do chimpanzees know what conspecifics know? Anim Behav 61:139–151
Hare B, Adressi E, Call J, Tomasello M, Visalberghi E (2003) Do capuchin monkeys, Cebus apella, know what conspecifics do and do not see? Anim Behav 65:131–142
Hattori Y, Kuroshima H, Fujita K (2005) Cooperative problem solving by tufted capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella): spontaneous division of labor, communication, and reciprocal altruism. J Com Psychol 119:335–342
Hattori Y, Kuroshima H, Fujita K (2007) I know you are not looking at me: capuchin monkeys’(Cebus apella) sensitivity to human attentional states. Anim Cogn 2:141–148
Hostetter AB, Russell JL, Freeman H, Hopkins WD (2007) Now you see me, now you don’t: evidence that chimpanzees understand the role of the eyes in attention. Anim Cogn 10:55–62
Kaminski J, Call J, Tomasello M (2004) Body orientation and face orientation: two factors controlling apes’ begging behavior from humans. Anim Cogn 7:216–223
Kuroshima H, Fujita K, Masuda T (2002) Understanding of the relationship between seeing and knowing by capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella). Anim Cogn 5:41–48
Kuroshima H, Fujita K, Adachi I, Iwata K, Fuyuki A (2003) A capuchin monkey (Cebus apella) recognizes when people do and do not know the location of food. Anim Cogn 6:283–291
Leavens D, Hopkins W, Bard K (2005) Understanding the point of chimpanzee pointing: epigenesis and ecological validity. Curr Dir Psychol Sci 4:185–189
Liebal K, Mnller C, Pika S (2007) Gestural communication in nonhuman and human primates. J Benjamins, Philadelphia
Paukner A, Anderson JR, Fujita K (2004) Reactions of capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) to multiple mirrors. Behav Process 66:1–6
Perry S, Rose L (1994) Begging and transfer of coati meat by white-faced capuchin monkeys, Cebus capucinus. Primates 35:409–415
Perry S, Barrett HC, Manson JH (2004) White-faced capuchin monkeys show triadic awareness in their choice of allies. Anim Behav 67:165–170
Povinelli DJ (2003) Folk physics for apes: the chimpanzees theory of how the world works. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Povinelli DJ, Eddy TJ (1996) What young chimpanzees know about seeing. Monogr Soc Res Chilld Dev 61:1–191
Primate Research Institute, Kyoto University (2002) The 2nd version of guide for the care and use of laboratory animals. Kyoto University, Kyoto
Reaux JE, Theall LA, Povinelli DJ (1999) A longitudinal investigation of chimpanzees’ understanding of visual perception. Child Dev 70:275–290
Ryan TA (1960) Significance tests for multiple comparison of proportions, variances, and other statistics. Psychol Bull 57:318–328
Vick SJ, Anderson JR (2000) Learning and limits of use of eye gaze by capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) in an object-choice task. J Comp Psychol 114:200–207
Vick SJ, Anderson JR (2003) The use of visual orientation cues in a competitive task by olive baboons (Papio anubis). J Comp Psychol 117:209–216
Weigel RM (1979) The facial expression of the brown capuchin monkey (Cebus apella). Behavior 68:250–276
Acknowledgments
This study was supported by Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research No. 2053 to Yuko Hattori and 17300085 to Kazuo Fujita from Japan Society for the Promotion of Sciences and by the 21st Century COE Program, D-10, to Kyoto University, from Japan Ministry of Education, Culture, Sport, Science, and Technology. The subject monkeys were originally provided by the Cooperation Research Program from the Primate Research Institute, Kyoto University, with Tetsuro Matsuzawa as the counterpart. This study was approved by the Committee for the Animal Experiments, Graduate School of Letters, Kyoto University, and also strictly adhered to the 2nd version of Guide for the care and use of laboratory primates of the Primate Research Institute (2002).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hattori, Y., Kuroshima, H. & Fujita, K. Tufted capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) show understanding of human attentional states when requesting food held by a human. Anim Cogn 13, 87–92 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-009-0248-6
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-009-0248-6