Cognitive Research in Great Apes
Anthropologists often describe great apes as close relatives of human beings. As such, these primates have been subjected to extensive research as primatologists seek to understand their evolution, relationship with human beings, and similarities to humans regarding such aspects as cognition and learning. In many cases, studies on non-human primates offer insights into human beings’ developmental and evolutionary aspects. Many interesting questions can arise from primatology studies.
Arguably, the most interesting question is how learning and cognition among non-human primates compare to that of humans. To address this question, it is crucial to examine the current state of research into learning and cognition among non-human primates. As this research will reveal, empirical evidence suggests that non-human primates display remarkable cognitive flexibility in solving problems.
Research Settings and Environmental Influence
Interest in learning and cognition stems from the fact that primates’ key defining features include large brains and behavioral characteristics such as specialized tools. Examining learning and cognition helps understand observable behavioral characteristics. Research on non-human primate cognition dates back to the early 20th century, primarily in psychological laboratories (McEwen et al., 2022).
However, there has been a considerable shift towards zoos, which allows primatologists to observe primates in near-natural settings. It is important to note that further primate studies have also been conducted in the wild, where findings are compared to those from zoos and other settings. The differences in the findings indicate that the conditions in which primates live dictate their cognitive and learning behaviors.
For example, nut-cracking behavior among orangutans differs between zoos and the wild. Such a difference can be explained by the fact that orangutans in the wild have other food sources and may not need to crack nuts to obtain nutrition (Bandini et al., 2021). On the contrary, orangutans in zoos may have nuts as a primary food source, meaning that cracking nuts is necessary.
Environmental and Social Factors in Cognitive Development
A better explanation of the differences in learning and cognitive behaviors is the role of environmental factors. Research shows that animal behavior acquisition involves a complex combination of social learning mechanisms, genetic predispositions, individual learning mechanisms, and environmental factors (Motes‐Rodrigo & Tennie, 2021). Researchers consider tool use as a proxy for mental reasoning and physical cognition.
The cognitive abilities of caged and wild primates differ because caged animals are often provided with suitable enrichments (Motes‐Rodrigo & Tennie, 2021). In other words, animals in captivity are more exposed to tool use than in the wild, including during experiments. Therefore, the experiments may qualify as a social learning mechanism that differs between the wild and the zoos.
In the wild, social learning occurs when young primates observe and imitate older ones. In such a case, the environment is vital since tool use will depend on specific environments. In this case, captive primates innovate simple tool behaviors quicker than in the wild because appropriate conditions have been provided (Bandini et al., 2021).
Copying vs. Non-Copying Mechanisms in Social Learning
The field of animal social learning comprises multiple mechanisms and terminologies. Examples of such mechanisms include copying and non-copying social learning (Bandini et al., 2021). Copying is a form of social learning that entails transmitting actual behavior form or artifact. In this case, ‘form’ refers to the specific action components and behavioral organization. Therefore, copying involves transmitting knowledge, including mechanisms such as imitation and certain emulation types.
Non-copying social learning mechanisms have social effects, but those effects do not entail transmitting the behavior form or artifact. In other words, non-copying social learning regulates and catalyzes the frequency of acquiring behavior and artifacts, including increasing the motivation to interact with or manipulate objects.
Nut cracking among chimpanzees is acquired during juvenile stages during a sensitive learning window. Those who fail to develop the knowledge within the window do not do so in later stages (Bandini et al., 2021). Research indicates that such skills are often acquired through observing first and then copying (Motes‐Rodrigo & Tennie, 2021). Novel tool behaviors are part of individual learning or non-copying social learning.
Human Interaction and Cognitive Development in Captivity
Psychologists often use social learning theories to illustrate how people learn from each other through imitation, modeling, and observation. Copying and non-copying social learning in non-human primates illustrate the similarities between humans and other primates. However, few studies have been dedicated to assessing how primates can learn from each other through interaction. Hints of such processes manifest when researchers acknowledge that prolonged exposure to human cultural environments and human-led training enhance social learning and cognition among primates (Motes‐Rodrigo & Tennie, 2021). Therefore, such a finding is evidence that environmental factors in zoos play a vital role in the cognitive behaviors of primates and explain the differences in the cognitive abilities of wild primates.
Zoos allow humans and other primates to interact, allowing the animals to learn behavior forms from people. In other cases, the primates have been trained to behave in specific ways through conditioning, which changes brain structures to facilitate copying deeds (Bandini et al., 2021). Since zoo conditions differ from the wild, individual learning can also occur independently of humans and other primates.
Questioning the Validity of Zoo-Based Studies
Considering the findings presented above regarding the learning and cognitive abilities of non-human primates, the primary concern now is whether studies undertaken in zoos should be regarded as valid. Some scholars acknowledge an emerging symbiotic relationship between scholars and zoos (McEwen et al., 2022). In other words, primatologists are increasingly dependent on zoos because of their convenience and diversity.
While both parties gain significant advantages, the effects on the data still need to be explored. If prolonged interactions between humans and non-human primates affect the social learning and cognitive functioning of non-human primates, the findings from zoos lose the generalizability factor. In other words, findings from zoos may not apply to wild primates since the social learning environment is significantly different.
Such an observation may also explain why nut cracking has yet to be reported among wild chimpanzees. In the wild, chimpanzees may use sticks to extract termites or bees from their nests (Bandini et al., 2021). In zoos, the same species can be observed cracking nuts using hammers. In this case, standardized tests are not recommended for the two settings.
References
Bandini, Elisa, Johannes Grossmann, Martina Funk, Anna Albiach‐Serrano, and Claudio Tennie. 2021. “Naïve Orangutans (Pongo Abelii and Pongo Pygmaeus) Individually Acquire Nut‐Cracking Using Hammer Tools.” American Journal of Primatology 83(9).
McEwen, Emma S., Elizabeth Warren, Sadie Tenpas, et al. 2022. “Primate Cognition in Zoos: Reviewing the Impact of Zoo‐Based Research over 15 Years.” American Journal of Primatology 84(10).
Motes‐Rodrigo, Alba, and Claudio Tennie. 2021. “Captive Great Apes Tend to Innovate Simple Tool Behaviors Quickly.” American Journal of Primatology 84(10).