How Social Context,Token Value,and Time Course Affect Token Exchange in Capuchin Monkeys (<Emphasis Type="Italic">Cebus apella</Emphasis>)

Although numerous studies have examined token-directed behaviors in primates, few have done so in a social context despite the fact that most primate species live in complex groups. Here, we provided capuchin monkeys with a relatively limited budget of tokens, likely to elicit intragroup competition, and, after an overnight delay, we allowed them to exchange tokens while in a group setting. We aimed to 1) evaluate whether social context affects token-directed behaviors of knowledgeable subjects, i.e., subjects already proficient in token exchange before the present study, as well as of naïve subjects, i.e., subjects that never showed exchange behavior before this study; 2) appraise whether capuchins indeed value tokens; and 3) assess whether capuchins can refrain from throwing tokens outside their enclosure when the experimenter is not present. Overall, the social context positively affected high-ranking individuals and negatively affected low-ranking ones. All 6 high-ranking naïve subjects, but none of the 4 low-ranking ones, quickly acquired token exchange behavior, whereas 9 of 12 low-ranking knowledgeable subjects, but only 1 high-ranking knowledgeable subject, never displayed token exchange in social contexts. Thus, competition constrained token exchange in low-ranking subjects and prompted exchange behavior in high-ranking naïve subjects. Capuchins were unable to inhibit the exchange of valueless items when the experimenter was soliciting them and, at the group level, knowledgeable subjects did not exchange more valuable tokens than less valuable (or valueless) ones. However, the 3 high-ranking knowledgeable subjects that exchanged most of the tokens first preferentially exchanged more valuable tokens over less valuable or valueless ones. Finally, capuchins inhibited exchange behavior in the absence of the experimenter, thus recognizing the appropriate conditions in which a successful exchange could occur.     

Delay Maintenance in Tonkean Macaques (<Emphasis Type="BoldItalic">Macaca tonkeana</Emphasis>) and Brown Capuchin Monkeys (<Emphasis Type="BoldItalic">Cebus apella</Emphasis>)

Animals commonly face choices requiring them to wait and postpone action. The ability to delay gratification is a prerequisite for making future-oriented decisions. We investigated the ability of brown capuchins (Cebus apella) and Tonkean macaques (Macaca tonkeana) to delay benefits in several experiments. In exchange tasks, subjects had to return a piece of cookie after a given time lag to obtain a larger one from an experimenter. Capuchins could wait 10–40 s and macaques 20–80 s depending on subjects and the size of rewards. Both groups were able to anticipate delay durations, but unlike macaques, capuchins discounted all sizes of reward at the same speed, meaning that their delay-maintenance was not affected by the reward size. When the subjects could give the initial piece of cookie back immediately and then wait for the return, performances increased to 10–21 min for capuchins and 21–42 min for macaques, demonstrating the role of consumption inhibition in postponing gratification. In a further task, we presented subjects with an accumulation of food pieces added at short intervals until they seized them. On average, brown capuchins could wait 33–42 s and macaques 38–72 s before seizing the rewards. Our results confirmed that brown capuchins were more impulsive than Tonkean macaques in several tasks. We did not find significant differences between the waiting performances of the Tonkean macaques and those previously reported in long-tailed macaques. The contrasting performances of macaques and capuchins might be related to their different skills in the physical and social domains.     

A concept of value during experimental exchange in brown capuchin monkeys, Cebus apella

We evaluated the response of brown capuchin monkeys to two differentially valued tokens in an experimental exchange situation akin to a simple barter. Monkeys were given a series of three tests to evaluate their ability to associate tokens with food, then their responses were examined in a barter situation in which tokens were either limited or unlimited. Capuchins did not perform barter in the typical sense, returning the tokens which were associated with the reward. However, females, but not males, showed a different response, preferring the higher-value token. This may indicate that they learned to prefer one token over the other rather than to associate the tokens with their specific rewards. This sex difference parallels previous findings of greater reciprocity in female brown capuchins than in males.     

Crows and common ravens do not reciprocally exchange tokens with a conspecific to gain food rewards

Human economic transactions are based on complex forms of reciprocity, which involve the capacities to share and to keep track of what was given and received over time. Animals too engage in reciprocal interactions, but mechanisms such as calculated reciprocity have only been shown experimentally in few species. Various forms of cooperation, for example food and information sharing, are frequently observed in corvids, and they can engage in exchange interactions with human experimenters and accept delayed rewards. Here, we tested whether crows and common ravens would reciprocally exchange tokens with a conspecific in an exchange task. Birds received a set of three different types of tokens, some valuable for themselves, that is, they could exchange them for a food reward with a human experimenter, some valuable for their partner and some without value. The valuable tokens differed between the birds, which means that each bird could obtain more self-value tokens from their partner's compartment. We did not observe any active transfers, that is one individual giving a token to the experimental partner by placing it in its beak. We only observed 6 indirect transfers, that is one individual transferring a token into the compartment of the partner (3 no-value, 1 partner-value and 2 self-value tokens) and 67 “passive” transfers, that is one subject taking the token lying in reach in the compartment of the partner. Individuals took significantly more self-value tokens compared with no-value and partner-value tokens. This indicates a preference for tokens valuable to focal individuals. Significantly more no-value tokens compared with partner-value tokens were taken, likely to be caused by experimental partners exchanging self-value tokens with the human experimenter, and therefore, more no-value tokens being available in the compartment. Our results presently do not provide empirical support for reciprocity in crows and ravens, most likely caused by them not understanding the potential roles of receiver and donor. We therefore suggest further empirical tests of calculated reciprocity to be necessary in corvids.     

Species-Specific Responses to Tourist Interactions by White-Faced Capuchins (Cebus imitator) and Mantled Howlers (Alouatta palliata) in a Costa Rican Wildlife Refuge

Ecotourism shows great potential for primate conservation, but further investigation through an ethnoprimatological lens is vital to understanding species-specific variation in human–nonhuman primate interactions at ecotourism sites. This study measured the rates and types of human–monkey interactions, the participants in these encounters, and the association between tourist numbers and interaction rates with white-faced capuchin monkeys (Cebus imitator) and mantled howlers (Alouatta palliata) at the Curú Wildlife Refuge in western Costa Rica. I collected data through 15-min all-occurrence samples for human–monkey interactions between January 2006 and December 2007. I recorded and analyzed a total of 1949 discrete interactions, representing one tourist group and one non-tourist group for each species. For both species, tourist groups showed more varied and more intense—but not more frequent—human–monkey interactions than the non-tourist groups. White-faced capuchins differed from mantled howlers in their greater frequency and more variable forms of human–monkey interactions. White-faced capuchins also showed a more gregarious pattern of interactions than mantled howlers, with most capuchin interactions being initiated by the monkeys and involving multiple actors. Although mantled howler human interaction rates correlated positively with levels of human traffic, white-faced capuchins did not show this relationship. These findings demonstrate that the differences in human–monkey interactions across species are an important consideration for the management of primate tourism sites. This study suggests that species-specific guidelines for ecotourism would reduce visitor impact on nonhuman primates.     

Capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) fail to show inequality aversion in a no-cost situation

Although humans show robust equality concerns across a variety of situations, there is ongoing debate regarding the extent to which any nonhuman species is inequality averse. In the current research, we test nonhuman primates' reactions to conspecifics receiving equal and unequal payoffs using a “no-cost” method in which subjects can respond to inequality without rejecting food. Specifically, we gave capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) the opportunity to trade with one of two experimenters, each of whom offered the subject an identical reward, but had different histories of trading with the subject and a conspecific partner. An “equal” experimenter had previously given a conspecific the same reward that the subject had received, whereas the other experimenter was either an “advantageous trader” for the subject (giving the conspecific an inferior reward) or a “disadvantageous trader” for the subject (giving the conspecific a superior reward). By offering subjects a choice between experimenters, we removed several competing demands that may have masked the expression of robust equality preferences in previous studies. Even though there was no cost associated with expressing an equality preference, we found no evidence that capuchins differentiated between equal and unequal experimenters.     

Can Monkeys Make Investments Based on Maximized Pay-off?

Animals can maximize benefits but it is not known if they adjust their investment according to expected pay-offs. We investigated whether monkeys can use different investment strategies in an exchange task. We tested eight capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) and thirteen macaques (Macaca fascicularis, Macaca tonkeana) in an experiment where they could adapt their investment to the food amounts proposed by two different experimenters. One, the doubling partner, returned a reward that was twice the amount given by the subject, whereas the other, the fixed partner, always returned a constant amount regardless of the amount given. To maximize pay-offs, subjects should invest a maximal amount with the first partner and a minimal amount with the second. When tested with the fixed partner only, one third of monkeys learned to remove a maximal amount of food for immediate consumption before investing a minimal one. With both partners, most subjects failed to maximize pay-offs by using different decision rules with each partner' quality. A single Tonkean macaque succeeded in investing a maximal amount to one experimenter and a minimal amount to the other. The fact that only one of over 21 subjects learned to maximize benefits in adapting investment according to experimenters' quality indicates that such a task is difficult for monkeys, albeit not impossible.     

Food-exchange with humans in brown capuchin monkeys

To assess how brown capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) delay gratification and maximize payoff, we carried out four experiments in which six subjects could exchange food pieces with a human experimenter. The pieces differed either in quality or quantity. In qualitative exchanges, all subjects gave a piece of food to receive another of higher value. When the difference of value between the rewards to be returned and those expected was higher, subjects performed better. Only two subjects refrained from nibbling the piece of food before returning it. All subjects performed two or three qualitative exchanges in succession to obtain a given reward. In quantitative exchanges, three subjects returned a food item to obtain a bigger one, but two of them nibbled the item before returning it. Individual differences were marked. Subjects had some difficulties when the food to be returned was similar or equal in quality to that expected.     

Macaque Monkeys Can Learn Token Values from Human Models through Vicarious Reward

Monkeys can learn the symbolic meaning of tokens, and exchange them to get a reward. Monkeys can also learn the symbolic value of a token by observing conspecifics but it is not clear if they can learn passively by observing other actors, e.g., humans. To answer this question, we tested two monkeys in a token exchange paradigm in three experiments. Monkeys learned token values through observation of human models exchanging them. We used, after a phase of object familiarization, different sets of tokens. One token of each set was rewarded with a bit of apple. Other tokens had zero value (neutral tokens). Each token was presented only in one set. During the observation phase, monkeys watched the human model exchange tokens and watched them consume rewards (vicarious rewards). In the test phase, the monkeys were asked to exchange one of the tokens for food reward. Sets of three tokens were used in the first experiment and sets of two tokens were used in the second and third experiments. The valuable token was presented with different probabilities in the observation phase during the first and second experiments in which the monkeys exchanged the valuable token more frequently than any of the neutral tokens. The third experiments examined the effect of unequal probabilities. Our results support the view that monkeys can learn from non-conspecific actors through vicarious reward, even a symbolic task like the token-exchange task.     

Do capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) use tokens as symbols?

In the absence of language, the comprehension of symbols is difficult to demonstrate. Tokens can be considered symbols since they arbitrarily stand for something else without having any iconic relation to their referent. We assessed whether capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) can use tokens as symbols to represent and combine quantities. Our paradigm involved choices between various combinations of tokens A and B, worth one and three rewards, respectively. Pay-off maximization required the assessment of the value of each offer by (i) estimating token numerousness, (ii) representing what each token stands for and (iii) making simple computations. When one token B was presented against one to five tokens A (experiment 1), four out of ten capuchins relied on a flexible strategy that allowed to maximize their pay-off, i.e. they preferred one token B against one and two tokens A, and they preferred four or five tokens A against one token B. Moreover, when two tokens B were presented against three to six tokens A (experiment 2), two out of six capuchins performed summation over representation of quantities. These findings suggest that capuchins can use tokens as symbols to flexibly combine quantities.     

Helping behaviour and regard for others in capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella)

Altruism is an evolutionary puzzle. To date, much debate has focused on whether helping others without regard to oneself is a uniquely human behaviour, with a variety of empirical studies demonstrating a lack of altruistic behaviour in chimpanzees even when the demands of behaving altruistically seem minimal. By contrast, a recent experiment has demonstrated that chimpanzees will help a human experimenter to obtain an out-of-reach object, irrespective of whether or not they are offered a reward for doing so, suggesting that the cognitions underlying altruistic behaviour may be highly sensitive to situational demands. Here, we examine the cognitive demands of other-regarding behaviour by testing the conditions under which primates more distantly related to humans--capuchin monkeys--help an experimenter to obtain an out-of-reach object. Like chimpanzees, capuchin monkeys helped human experimenters even in the absence of a reward, but capuchins systematically failed to take into account the perspective of others when they stood to obtain food for themselves. These results suggest an important role for perspective taking and inhibition in altruistic behaviour and seem to reflect a significant evolutionary development in the roots of altruism, and specifically in other-regarding behaviour, between the divergence of New World monkeys and apes.     

Responses to a simple barter task in chimpanzees, Pan troglodytes

Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) frequently participate in social exchange involving multiple goods and services of variable value, yet they have not been tested in a formalized situation to see whether they can barter using multiple tokens and rewards. We set up a simple barter economy with two tokens and two associated rewards and tested chimpanzees on their ability to obtain rewards by returning the matching token in situations in which their access to tokens was unlimited or limited. Chimpanzees easily learned to associate value with the tokens, as expected, and did barter, but followed a simple strategy of favoring the higher-value token, regardless of the reward proffered, instead of a more complex but more effective strategy of returning the token that matched the reward. This response is similar to that shown by capuchin monkeys in our previous study. We speculate that this response, while not ideal, may be sufficient to allow for stability of the social exchange system in these primates, and that the importance of social barter to both species may have led to this convergence of strategies.     

When and how well can human‐socialized capuchins match actions demonstrated by a familiar human?

Capuchin monkeys have provided uneven evidence of matching actions they observe others perform. In accord with theories emphasizing the attentional salience of object movement and spatial relationships, we predicted that human-reared monkeys would better match events in which a human demonstrator moved an object into a new relation with another object or surface than other kinds of actions. Three human-reared capuchins were invited repeatedly by a familiar human to perform a fixed set of actions upon objects or upon their bodies, using the "Do as I do" procedure. Actions directed at the body were matched less reliably than actions involving objects, and actions were matched best when the monkey looked at the demonstration for at least 2 sec and performed its action within a few seconds after the demonstration. The most commonly matched actions were those that one monkey performed relatively often when the experiment began. One monkey partially reproduced three novel actions (out of 48 demonstrations), all three involving moving or placing objects, and two of which it also performed following other demonstrations. These findings contribute convergent evidence that capuchin monkeys display social facilitation of activity, enhanced interest in particular objects and emulation of spatial outcomes. This pattern can support the development of shared manipulative skills, as evident in traditions of foraging and tool use in natural settings. The findings do not suggest that human rearing substantively altered capuchins' ability or interest in matching the actions of a familiar human, although visual attention to the human demonstrator may have been greater in these monkeys than in normally reared monkeys.     

Acquisition of object-robbing and object/food-bartering behaviours: a culturally maintained token economy in free-ranging long-tailed macaques

The token exchange paradigm shows that monkeys and great apes are able to use objects as symbolic tools to request specific food rewards. Such studies provide insights into the cognitive underpinnings of economic behaviour in non-human primates. However, the ecological validity of these laboratory-based experimental situations tends to be limited. Our field research aims to address the need for a more ecologically valid primate model of trading systems in humans. Around the Uluwatu Temple in Bali, Indonesia, a large free-ranging population of long-tailed macaques spontaneously and routinely engage in token-mediated bartering interactions with humans. These interactions occur in two phases: after stealing inedible and more or less valuable objects from humans, the macaques appear to use them as tokens, by returning them to humans in exchange for food. Our field observational and experimental data showed (i) age differences in robbing/bartering success, indicative of experiential learning, and (ii) clear behavioural associations between value-based token possession and quantity or quality of food rewards rejected and accepted by subadult and adult monkeys, suggestive of robbing/bartering payoff maximization and economic decision-making. This population-specific, prevalent, cross-generational, learned and socially influenced practice may be the first example of a culturally maintained token economy in free-ranging animals.This article is part of the theme issue ‘Existence and prevalence of economic behaviours among non-human primates''.     

Partner's behavior, not reward distribution, determines success in an unequal cooperative task in capuchin monkeys

It was recently demonstrated that capuchin monkeys notice and respond to distributional inequity, a trait that has been proposed to support the evolution of cooperation in the human species. However, it is unknown how capuchins react to inequitable rewards in an unrestricted cooperative paradigm in which they may freely choose both whether to participate and, within the bounds of their partner's behavior, which reward they will receive for their participation. We tested capuchin monkeys with such a design, using a cooperative barpull, which has been used with great success in the past. Contrary to our expectations, the equity of the reward distribution did not affect success or pulling behavior. However, the behavior of the partner in an unequal situation did affect overall success rates: pairs that had a tendency to alternate which individual received the higher-value food in unequal reward situations were more than twice as successful in obtaining rewards than pairs in which one individual dominated the higher-value food. This ability to equitably distribute rewards in inherently biased cooperative situations has profound implications for activities such as group hunts, in which multiple individuals work together for a single, monopolizable reward.     

Extraction of hermit crabs from their shells by white-faced capuchin monkeys (<Emphasis Type="Italic">Cebus capucinus</Emphasis>)

We observed two capuchin monkeys (Cebus capucinus) feeding on hermit crabs (Coenobita compressus) on the coast, and the tactics they used to extract this well-protected prey. The observations took place during the dry season at Playa Escondida beach, Puntarenas, Costa Rica. The capuchins descended from trees at the back edge of the beach to capture passing hermit crabs. Both capuchins extracted the hermit crabs from their protective shells by holding the shell with one hand and pulling the crab out with the other. Even though this was accomplished within seconds, the extraction of hermit crabs from their shells did not appear to be a straightforward task. Once the capuchins succeeded in pulling the crabs out of their shells, they consumed the soft abdomen and discarded the rest of the crab's body. To our knowledge, the consumption of hermit crabs has not been previously reported for any capuchin monkey (Cebus or Sapajus). Our observations provide a new example of extractive foraging by capuchins, and thus an additional natural context for which fine motor skills (which are highly developed in capuchins) are necessary.     

Hand preference in capuchin monkeys varies with age

The purpose of this research was to examine the influence of age on hand preference in capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella). Twenty-two capuchins, aged 6 months to 30 years, were presented with a task that involved reaching for food and a task that involved using sponging tools to absorb juice. Adults exhibited a greater percentage of right-handed actions in each task than did immature subjects. Adults also exhibited a stronger lateral bias than did immature subjects in the sponging task. These results are consistent with hypotheses: a) adult capuchin monkeys are biased toward use of their right hand for reaching; b) adult capuchins exhibit a greater incidence of right-hand preference than do immature capuchins; and c) primates exhibit age-related differences in the strength and direction of hand preference in tasks that involve the use of tools.     

Macaques (Macaca nemestrina) recognize when they are being imitated

This study investigated whether monkeys recognize when a human experimenter imitates their actions towards an object. Two experimenters faced 10 pigtailed macaques, who were given access to an interesting object. One experimenter imitated the monkeys' object-directed actions, the other performed temporally contingent but structurally different object-directed actions. Results show a significant visual preference for the imitator during manual object manipulations, but not mouthing actions. We argue that the ability to match actions could be based on both visual-visual and kinaesthetic-visual matching skills, and that mirror neurons, which have both visual and motor properties, could serve as a neural basis for recognizing imitation. However, imitation recognition as assessed by visual preference does not necessarily imply the capacity to attribute imitative intentionality to the imitator. The monkeys might implicitly recognize when they are being imitated without deeper insight into the mental processes of others.     

The effects of provisioning and crop-raiding on the diet and foraging activities of human-commensal white-faced capuchins (Cebus capucinus)

Non-human primates are coming into increasingly frequent contact with humans and with human-modified environments. The potential for monkeys to survive in such modified landscapes is questionable, and is likely related to a species' behavioral plasticity, particularly as it relates to diet. In this study, I explore the ways in which white-faced capuchins (Cebus capucinus) adjust their diet and foraging behaviors in response to anthropogenic impact. I compare a troop of human-commensal monkeys and a similar troop of wild-feeding monkeys living within the Curú Wildlife Refuge in western Costa Rica for differences in overall diet composition and activity budgets to evaluate the impact of habitat change in this context. The commensal-living white-faced capuchins rely on raided coconut (Cocos nucifera) and oil palm (Elaeis guineensis) crops and provisioned or stolen human foods for over one-half of their total diet. Regardless of this highly anthropogenic diet, the two study troops do not significantly differ in their activity budgets, and the human-commensal troop maintains wild-foraging activities consistent with those of the wild-feeding troop. These data suggest that the white-faced capuchins at this site are responding to anthropogenic disturbance primarily through the exploitation of human food resources, but they do not yet appear to have lost the foraging skills required to survive in this modified landscape on their own. This study adds to our growing body of knowledge on primate survival in matrix habitats, and will hopefully inform primate management plans throughout the Neotropics.     

Attending to the outcome of others: disadvantageous inequity aversion in male capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella)

Brosnan and de Waal [Nature 425:297-299, 2003] reported that capuchin monkeys responded negatively to unequal reward distributions between themselves and another individual when comparing their own rewards with that of their partner. It was suggested that social emotions provided the underlying motivation for such behavior and that this inequity aversion is specific to the social domain. However, alternative hypotheses such as the "frustration effect" or the "food expectation hypothesis" may provide more parsimonious explanations for Brosnan and de Waal's [Nature 425:297-299] results, while others have argued that these findings are not congruent with the Fehr-Schmidt inequity aversion model cited by the authors. The claim that inequity aversion behavior is specific to the social domain has also been questioned, as primates also develop expectations about rewards in the absence of partners, and react negatively when those expectations are violated. In this study, a modified Dictator game was used to investigate whether capuchins would exhibit either disadvantageous inequity aversion behavior or reference-dependent expectancy violation in social and nonsocial conditions, respectively. When given the choice between an equitable and an inequitable outcome, the subjects showed disadvantageous inequity aversion behavior, choosing the equitable outcome significantly more in the social condition. In the nonsocial condition, however, subjects did not show negative expectancy violation resulting from the formation of reference-dependent expectations, choosing the equitable outcome at chance levels. These results suggest that capuchins attend to differential payoffs and that they are averse to inequity, which is disadvantageous to themselves.