Chimpanzees’ Socially Maintained Food Preferences Indicate both Conservatism and Conformity

Chimpanzees remain fixed on a single strategy, even if a novel, more efficient, strategy is introduced. Previous studies reporting such findings have incorporated paradigms in which chimpanzees learn one behavioural method and then are shown a new one that the chimpanzees invariably do not adopt. This study provides the first evidence that chimpanzees show such conservatism even when the new method employs the identical required behaviour as the first, but for a different reward. Groups of chimpanzees could choose to exchange one of two inedible tokens; one was rewarded with a highly preferred food (grape) and the other with a less preferred food (carrot). Individuals first observed a model chimpanzee from their social group trained to choose one of the two types of tokens. In one group, this token earned a carrot, while in the other, control, group the token earned a grape. In both groups, chimpanzees conformed to the trained model’s choice. This was especially striking for those gaining the pieces of carrot; the less favoured reward. This resulted in a population-level trend of food choices, even when counter to their original, individual, preferences. Moreover, the chimpanzees’ food preferences did not change over time, demonstrating that these results were not due to a simple shift in preferences. We discuss social factors apparent in the interactions and suggest that, despite seeming to be inefficient, in chimpanzees, conformity may benefit them, possibly by assisting with the maintenance of group relations

When Given the Opportunity, Chimpanzees Maximize Personal Gain Rather than “Level the Playing Field”

We provided chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) with the ability to improve the quality of food rewards they received in a dyadic test of inequity.We were interested to see if this provision influenced their responses and, if so, whether it was mediated by a social partner’s outcomes. We tested eight dyads using an exchange paradigm in which, depending on the condition, the chimpanzees were rewarded with either high-value (a grape) or low-value (a piece of celery) food rewards for each completed exchange. We included four conditions. In the first, “Different” condition, the subject received different, less-preferred, rewards than their partner for each exchange made (a test of inequity). In the “Unavailable” condition, high-value rewards were shown, but not given, to both chimpanzees prior to each exchange and the chimpanzees were rewarded equally with low-value rewards (a test of individual contrast). The final two conditions created equity. In these High-value and Low-value “Same” conditions both chimpanzees received the same food rewards for each exchange.Within each condition, the chimpanzees first completed ten trials in the Baseline Phase, in which the experimenter determined the rewards they received, and then ten trials in the Test Phase. In the Test Phase, the chimpanzees could exchange tokens through the aperture of a small wooden picture frame hung on their cage mesh in order to receive the high-value reward. Thus, in the Test Phase, the chimpanzees were provided with an opportunity to improve the quality of the rewards they received, either absolutely or relative to what their partner received. The chimpanzees responded in a targeted manner; in the Test Phase they attempted to maximize their returns in all conditions in which they had received low-value rewards during the Baseline Phase. Thus, the chimpanzees were apparently motivated to increase their reward regardless of their partners’, but they only used the mechanism provided when it afforded the opportunity for them to increase their rewards.We also found evidence that the chimpanzees’ responses were enhanced by social facilitation. Specifically, the chimpanzees were more likely to exchange their tokens through the frame when their test partner also did so, even in circumstances in which their reward value could not be improved. Our paradigm provided the chimpanzees with the possibility to improve the quality of rewards they received in the Test Phase. We found that refusals – to exchange tokens or to eat rewards – decreased significantly in the Test Phase compared to the Baseline Phase, where no such opportunity for improvement of outcomes existed. Thus, the chimpanzees participated more when they could improve the rewards they received

Mechanisms Underlying the Response to Inequitable Outcomes in Chimpanzees, Pan Troglodytes

Several species of non-human primates respond negatively to inequitable outcomes, a trait shared with humans. Despite previous research, questions regarding the response to inequity remain. In this study, we replicated the methodology from previous studies to address four questions related to inequity. First, we explored the impact of basic social factors. Second, we addressed whether negative responses to inequity require a task, or exist when rewards are given for ‘free’. Third, we addressed whether differences in the experimental procedure or the level of effort required to obtain a reward affected responses. Finally, we explored the interaction between ‘individual’ expectations (based on one’s own previous experience) and ‘social’ expectations (based on the partner’s experience). These questions were investigated in 16 socially-housed adult chimpanzees using eight conditions that varied across the dimensions of reward, effort, and procedure. Subjects did respond to inequity, but only in the context of a task. Differences in procedure and level of effort required did not cause individuals to change their behavior. Males were more sensitive to social than to individual expectation, while females were more sensitive to individual expectation. Finally, subjects also increased refusals when receiving a better reward than their partner, which has not been seen previously. These results indicate that chimpanzees are more sensitive to reward inequity than procedures, and that there is interaction between social and individual expectations that depends upon social factors

Evolution and the Expression of Biases: Situational Value Changes the Endowment Effect in Chimpanzees

Cognitive and behavioral biases, which are widespread among humans, have recently been demonstrated in other primates, suggesting a common origin. Here we examine whether the expression of one shared bias, the endowment effect, varies as a function of context. We tested whether objects lacking inherent value elicited a stronger endowment effect (or preference for keeping the object) in a context in which the objects had immediate instrumental value for obtaining valuable resources (food). Chimpanzee subjects had opportunities to trade tools when food was not present, visible but unobtainable, and obtainable using the tools. We found that the endowment effect for these tools existed only when they were immediately useful, showing that the effect varies as a function of context-specific utility. Such context-specific variation suggests that the variation seen in some human biases may trace predictably to behaviors that evolved to maximize gains in specific circumstances

Responses to the Assurance Game in Monkeys, Apes, and Humans Using Equivalent Procedures

There is great interest in the evolution of economic behavior. In typical studies, species are asked to play one of a series of economic games, derived from game theory, and their responses are compared. The advantage of this approach is the relative level of consistency and control that emerges from the games themselves; however, in the typical experiment, procedures and conditions differ widely, particularly between humans and other species. Thus, in the current study, we investigated how three primate species, capuchin monkeys, chimpanzees, and humans, played the Assurance (or Stag Hunt) game using procedures that were, to the best of our ability, the same across species, particularly with respect to training and pretesting. Our goal was to determine what, if any, differences existed in the ways in which these species made decisions in this game. We hypothesized differences along phylogenetic lines, which we found. However, the species were more similar than might be expected. In particular, humans who played using “nonhuman primate-friendly” rules did not behave as is typical. Thus, we find evidence for similarity in decision-making processes across the order Primates. These results indicate that such comparative studies are possible and, moreover, that in any comparison rating species’ relative abilities, extreme care must be taken in ensuring that one species does not have an advantage over the others due to methodological procedures

Statistical Multifragmentation in Central Au+Au Collisions at 35 MeV/u

Multifragment disintegrations, measured for central Au + Au collisions at E/A = 35 MeV, are analyzed with the Statistical Multifragmentation Model. Charge distributions, mean fragment energies, and two-fragment correlation functions are well reproduced by the statistical breakup of a large, diluted and thermalized system slightly above the multifragmentation threshold.Comment: Latex file, 8 pages + 4 postscript figures available upon request from [email protected]

Chimpanzees Do Not Take Advantage of Very Low Cost Opportunities to Deliver Food to Unrelated Group Members

We conducted experiments on two populations of chimpanzees, Pan troglodytes, to determine whether they would take advantage of opportunities to provide food rewards to familiar group members at little cost to themselves. In both of the experiments described here, chimpanzees were able to deliver identical rewards to themselves and to other members of their social groups. We compared the chimpanzees\u27 behaviour when they were paired with another chimpanzee and when they were alone. If chimpanzees are motivated to provide benefits to others, they are expected to consistently deliver rewards to others and to distinguish between the partner-present and partner-absent conditions. Results from both experiments indicate that our subjects were largely indifferent to the benefits they could provide to others. They were less likely to provide rewards to potential recipients as the experiment progressed, and all but one of the 18 subjects were as likely to deliver rewards to an empty enclosure as to an enclosure housing another chimpanzee. These results, in conjunction with similar results obtained in previous experiments, suggest that chimpanzees are not motivated by prosocial sentiments to provide food rewards to other group members. The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour. Published by Elsevier Ltd

Charge-Induced Fragmentation of Sodium Clusters

The fission of highly charged sodium clusters with fissilities X>1 is studied by {\em ab initio} molecular dynamics. Na_{24}^{4+} is found to undergo predominantly sequential Na_{3}^{+} emission on a time scale of 1 ps, while Na_{24}^{Q+} (5 \leq Q \leq 8) undergoes multifragmentation on a time scale \geq 0.1 ps, with Na^{+} increasingly the dominant fragment as Q increases. All singly-charged fragments Na_{n}^{+} up to size n=6 are observed. The observed fragment spectrum is, within statistical error, independent of the temperature T of the parent cluster for T \leq 1500 K. These findings are consistent with and explain recent trends observed experimentally.Comment: To appear in Physical Review Letter

Multifragment production in Au+Au at 35 MeV/u

Multifragment disintegration has been measured with a high efficiency detection system for the reaction $Au + Au$ at $E/A = 35\ MeV$. From the event shape analysis and the comparison with the predictions of a many-body trajectories calculation the data, for central collisions, are compatible with a fast emission from a unique fragment source.Comment: 9 pages, LaTex file, 4 postscript figures available upon request from [email protected]. - to appear in Phys. Lett.

Comparative Economics: Responses to the Assurance Game in Monkeys, Apes, and Humans Using Equivalent Procedures

There is great interest in the evolution of economic behavior. In typical studies, species are asked to play one of a series of economic games, derived from game theory, and their responses are compared. The advantage of this approach is the relative level of consistency and control that emerges from the games themselves; however in the typical experiment, procedures and conditions differ widely, particularly between humans and other species. Thus, in the current study we investigated how three primate species, capuchin monkeys, chimpanzees, and humans, played the Assurance (or Stag Hunt) Game using procedures which were, to the best of our ability, the same across species, particularly with respect to training and pre-testing. Our goal was to determine what, if any, differences existed in the ways in which these species made decisions in this game. We hypothesized differences along phylogenetic lines, which we found. However, the species were more similar than might be expected. In particular, humans who played using ‘non-human primate-friendly’ rules did not behave as is typical. Thus, we find evidence for similarity in decision-making processes across the Order Primates. These results indicate that such comparative studies are possible and moreover that in any comparison rating species’ relative abilities, extreme care must be taken in ensuring that one species does not have an advantage over the others due to methodological procedures