Gestural communication of the gorilla (Gorilla gorilla): repertoire, intentionality and possible origins

Social groups of gorillas were observed in three captive facilities and one African field site. Cases of potential gesture use, totalling 9,540, were filtered by strict criteria for intentionality, giving a corpus of 5,250 instances of intentional gesture use. This indicated a repertoire of 102 gesture types. Most repertoire differences between individuals and sites were explicable as a consequence of environmental affordances and sampling effects: overall gesture frequency was a good predictor of universality of occurrence. Only one gesture was idiosyncratic to a single individual, and was given only to humans. Indications of cultural learning were few, though not absent. Six gestures appeared to be traditions within single social groups, but overall concordance in repertoires was almost as high between as within social groups. No support was found for the ontogenetic ritualization hypothesis as the chief means of acquisition of gestures. Many gestures whose form ruled out such an origin, i.e. gestures derived from species-typical displays, were used as intentionally and almost as flexibly as gestures whose form was consistent with learning by ritualization. When using both classes of gesture, gorillas paid specific attention to the attentional state of their audience. Thus, it would be unwarranted to divide ape gestural repertoires into ‘innate, species-typical, inflexible reactions’ and ‘individually learned, intentional, flexible communication’. We conclude that gorilla gestural communication is based on a species-typical repertoire, like those of most other mammalian species but very much larger. Gorilla gestures are not, however, inflexible signals but are employed for intentional communication to specific individuals.     

The gestural repertoire of the wild chimpanzee

Great ape gestural communication is known to be intentional, elaborate and flexible; yet there is controversy over the best interpretation of the system and how gestures are acquired, perhaps because most studies have been made in restricted, captive settings. Here, we report the first systematic analysis of gesture in a population of wild chimpanzees. Over 266 days of observation, we recorded 4,397 cases of intentional gesture use in the Sonso community, Budongo, Uganda. We describe 66 distinct gesture types: this estimate appears close to asymptote, and the Sonso repertoire includes most gestures described informally at other sites. Differences in repertoire were noted between individuals and age classes, but in both cases, the measured repertoire size was predicted by the time subjects were observed gesturing. No idiosyncratic usages were found, i.e. no gesture type was used only by one individual. No support was found for the idea that gestures are acquired by ‘ontogenetic ritualization’ from originally effective actions; moreover, in detailed analyses of two gestures, action elements composing the gestures did not closely match those of the presumed original actions. Rather, chimpanzee gestures are species-typical; indeed, many are ‘family-typical’, because gesture types recorded in gorillas, orangutans and chimpanzee overlap extensively, with 24 gestures recorded in all three genera. Nevertheless, chimpanzee gestures are used flexibly across a range of contexts and show clear adjustment to audience (e.g. silent gestures for attentive targets, contact gestures for inattentive ones). Such highly intentional use of a species-typical repertoire raises intriguing questions for the evolution of advanced communication.     

Communicative intentions in wild chimpanzees: persistence and elaboration in gestural signalling

We examine evidence for communicative intent during conspecific interactions in wild chimpanzees (Budongo Forest, Uganda), focusing on persistence in gestural communication. Previous research indicates that great apes have large gestural repertoires and produce gestural communication in a flexible and intentional manner, including the production of gesture sequences. Although there is a lack of consensus on the form and function of sequences, there is some evidence that sequences are produced when signallers fail to receive any response from a recipient. Here, we provide first systematic evidence for communicative persistence in wild chimpanzees. Rather than examining only the presence or absence of a response, we used the most commonly observed response to assign meanings to gestures and examined sequence production in relation to response congruency. Chimpanzees ceased communication if successful, but persevered when unsuccessful. Chimpanzees repeated gestures when a response partially matched their goal but substituted the original gesture when a response was incongruent. Persistence was also mediated by recipient intent to respond, with more sequences produced within competitive than affiliative contexts. Gestures within sequences were homogenous in semantic meaning and signallers continued until the response matched the assigned meaning of the initial gesture. Gestural sequence production was not primarily affective; gesture intensity (in terms of modality) did not increase within sequences. Chimpanzee gestural sequences emerged to achieve specific outcomes; given variability in recipient behaviour following initial gestures, signallers were flexible in their persistence towards these goals.     

Great ape gestures: intentional communication with a rich set of innate signals

Great apes give gestures deliberately and voluntarily, in order to influence particular target audiences, whose direction of attention they take into account when choosing which type of gesture to use. These facts make the study of ape gesture directly relevant to understanding the evolutionary precursors of human language; here we present an assessment of ape gesture from that perspective, focusing on the work of the “St Andrews Group” of researchers. Intended meanings of ape gestures are relatively few and simple. As with human words, ape gestures often have several distinct meanings, which are effectively disambiguated by behavioural context. Compared to the signalling of most other animals, great ape gestural repertoires are large. Because of this, and the relatively small number of intended meanings they achieve, ape gestures are redundant, with extensive overlaps in meaning. The great majority of gestures are innate, in the sense that the species’ biological inheritance includes the potential to develop each gestural form and use it for a specific range of purposes. Moreover, the phylogenetic origin of many gestures is relatively old, since gestures are extensively shared between different genera in the great ape family. Acquisition of an adult repertoire is a process of first exploring the innate species potential for many gestures and then gradual restriction to a final (active) repertoire that is much smaller. No evidence of syntactic structure has yet been detected.     

The ontogenetic ritualization of bonobo gestures

Great apes communicate with gestures in flexible ways. Based on several lines of evidence, Tomasello and colleagues have posited that many of these gestures are learned via ontogenetic ritualization—a process of mutual anticipation in which particular social behaviors come to function as intentional communicative signals. Recently, Byrne and colleagues have argued that all great ape gestures are basically innate. In the current study, for the first time, we attempted to observe the process of ontogenetic ritualization as it unfolds over time. We focused on one communicative function between bonobo mothers and infants: initiation of “carries” for joint travel. We observed 1,173 carries in ten mother–infant dyads. These were initiated by nine different gesture types, with mothers and infants using many different gestures in ways that reflected their different roles in the carry interaction. There was also a fair amount of variability among the different dyads, including one idiosyncratic gesture used by one infant. This gestural variation could not be attributed to sampling effects alone. These findings suggest that ontogenetic ritualization plays an important role in the origin of at least some great ape gestures.     

Number gestures predict learning of number words

When asked to explain their solutions to a problem, children often gesture and, at times, these gestures convey information that is different from the information conveyed in speech. Children who produce these gesture‐speech “mismatches” on a particular task have been found to profit from instruction on that task. We have recently found that some children produce gesture‐speech mismatches when identifying numbers at the cusp of their knowledge, for example, a child incorrectly labels a set of two objects with the word “three” and simultaneously holds up two fingers. These mismatches differ from previously studied mismatches (where the information conveyed in gesture has the potential to be integrated with the information conveyed in speech) in that the gestured response contradicts the spoken response. Here, we ask whether these contradictory number mismatches predict which learners will profit from number‐word instruction. We used the Give‐a‐Number task to measure number knowledge in 47 children (M_age = 4.1 years, SD = 0.58), and used the What's on this Card task to assess whether children produced gesture‐speech mismatches above their knower level. Children who were early in their number learning trajectories (“one‐knowers” and “two‐knowers”) were then randomly assigned, within knower level, to one of two training conditions: a Counting condition in which children practiced counting objects; or an Enriched Number Talk condition containing counting, labeling set sizes, spatial alignment of neighboring sets, and comparison of these sets. Controlling for counting ability, we found that children were more likely to learn the meaning of new number words in the Enriched Number Talk condition than in the Counting condition, but only if they had produced gesture‐speech mismatches at pretest. The findings suggest that numerical gesture‐speech mismatches are a reliable signal that a child is ready to profit from rich number instruction and provide evidence, for the first time, that cardinal number gestures have a role to play in number‐learning.     

From action to discourse: The bridging function of gestures

Gestures are pervasive in human communication across cultures; they clearly constitute an embodied aspect of cognition. In this study, evidence is provided for the contention that gestures are not only a co-expression of meaning in a different modality but also constitute an important stepping stone in the evolution of discourse. Data are provided from a Grade 10 physics course where students learned about electrostatics by doing investigations for which they constructed explanations. The data show that iconic gestures (i.e. symbolic hand movements) arise from the manipulation of objects (ergotic hand movements) and sensing activity (epistemic hand movements). Gestures not only precede but also support the emergence of scientific language. School science classes turn out to be ideal laboratories for studying the evolution of domain ontologies and (scientific) language. Micro-analytic studies of gesture–speech relationships and their emergence can therefore serve as positive constraints and test beds for synthetic models of language emergence.     

The ‘circumstances’ of gestures: Proto-interrogatives and private gestures

The later Wittgenstein's emphasis on the social usage of language has been very influential in psychology, particularly in language acquisition research. This move toward a pragmatic position should also be applied to gestures in pre-linguistic children and to objects in the everyday contexts of use. The shared ‘forms of life’ presupposed by language involve pre-linguistic gestures and material ‘things’.Research on early communication has focused on proto-declarative and proto-imperative gestures. I extend this focus and propose further types of gestures: ‘proto-interrogatives’ - in which children “ask” for help or regulation from adults, and three types of ‘private gestures’ - ostensive, indexical and symbolic - in which children regulate their own behaviour. This diversity of gestures becomes apparent when objects are taken seriously. Wittgenstein's ‘language-games’ necessarily apply to games with objects and gestures as well: social meaning in all cases is emergent within the context of these ‘sign games’ and ‘circumstances.’     

Comprehension of symbolic gestures in aphasia

One-hundred-and-twenty-eight patients with unilateral hemispheric damage (53 aphasics, 26 nonaphasic left, and 49 right brain-damaged patients) and 25 normal controls were given a test of symbolic gesture comprehension and other tests of verbal comprehension and of reproduction of symbolic gestures. On the test of symbolic gesture interpretation aphasic patients performed significantly worse than any other group of brain-damaged patients. Within the aphasic patients the inability to understand the meaning of symbolic gestures was highly related to the number of semantic errors obtained at a verbal comprehension test. On the contrary, only a mild relationship was found between comprehension and reproduction of symbolic gestures. Some implications of these findings are discussed.     

Why do gorillas make sequences of gestures?

Great ape gestures have attracted considerable research interest in recent years, prompted by their flexible and intentional pattern of use; but almost all studies have focused on single gestures. Here, we report the first quantitative analysis of sequential gesture use in western gorillas (Gorilla gorilla gorilla), using data from three captive groups and one African study site. We found no evidence that gesture sequences were given for reasons of increased communicative efficiency over single gestures. Longer sequences of repeated gestures did not increase the likelihood of response, and using a sequence was seldom in reaction to communicative failure. Sequential combination of two gestures with similar meanings did not generally increase effectiveness, and sometimes reduced it. Gesture sequences were closely associated with play contexts. Markov transition analysis showed two networks of frequently co-occurring gestures, both consisting of gestures used to regulate play. One network comprised only tactile gestures, the other a mix of silent, audible and tactile gestures; apparently, these clusters resulted from gesture use in play with proximal or distal contact, respectively. No evidence was found for syntactic effects of sequential combination: meanings changed little or not at all. Semantically, many gestures overlapped massively with others in their core information (i.e. message), and gesture messages spanned relatively few functions. We suggest that the underlying semantics of gorilla gestures is highly simplified compared to that of human words. Gesture sequences allow continual adjustment of the tempo and nature of social interactions, rather than generally conveying semantically referential information or syntactic structures.     

The semantic specificity of gestures when verbal communication is not possible: The case of emergency evacuation

The aim of the present study was to examine the comprehension of gesture in a situation in which the communicator cannot (or can only with difficulty) use verbal communication. Based on theoretical considerations, we expected to obtain higher semantic comprehension for emblems (gestures with a direct verbal definition or translation that is well known by all members of a group, or culture) compared to illustrators (gestures regarded as spontaneous and idiosyncratic and that do not have a conventional definition). Based on the extant literature, we predicted higher semantic specificity associated with arbitrarily coded and iconically coded emblems compared to intrinsically coded illustrators. Using a scenario of emergency evacuation, we tested the difference in semantic specificity between different categories of gestures. 138 participants saw 10 videos each illustrating a gesture performed by a firefighter. They were requested to imagine themselves in a dangerous situation and to report the meaning associated with each gesture. The results showed that intrinsically coded illustrators were more successfully understood than arbitrarily coded emblems, probably because the meaning of intrinsically coded illustrators is immediately comprehensible without recourse to symbolic interpretation. Furthermore, there was no significant difference between the comprehension of iconically coded emblems and that of both arbitrarily coded emblems and intrinsically coded illustrators. It seems that the difference between the latter two types of gestures was supported by their difference in semantic specificity, although in a direction opposite to that predicted. These results are in line with those of Hadar and Pinchas‐Zamir (2004), which showed that iconic gestures have higher semantic specificity than conventional gestures.     

Serial gesturing by wild chimpanzees: its nature and function for communication

Chimpanzees at Budongo, Uganda, regularly gesture in series, including ‘bouts’ of gesturing that include response waiting and ‘sequences’ of rapid-fire gesturing without pauses. We examined the distribution and correlates of 723 sequences and 504 bouts for clues to the function of multigesture series. Gesturing by older chimpanzees was more likely to be successful, but the success rate of any particular gesture did not vary with signaller age. Rather, older individuals were more likely to choose successful gestures, and these highly successful gestures were more often used singly. These patterns explain why bouts were recorded most in younger animals, whereas older chimpanzees relied more on single gestures: bouts are best interpreted as a consequence of persistence in the face of failure. When at least one gesture of a successful type occurred in a sequence, that sequence was more likely to be successful; overall, however, sequences were less successful than single gestures. We suggest that young chimpanzees use sequences as a ‘fail-safe’ strategy: because they have the innate potential to produce a large and redundant repertoire of gestures but lack knowledge of which of them would be most efficient. Using sequences increases the chance of giving one effective gesture and also allows users to learn the most effective types. As they do so, they need to use sequences less; sequences may remain important for subtle interpersonal adjustment, especially in play. This ‘Repertoire Tuning’ hypothesis explains a number of results previously reported from chimpanzee gesturing.     

It's a sign of the kind: gestures and words guide infants' inductive inferences

The role of words and gestures in guiding infants' inductive inferences about nonobvious properties was examined. One hundred seventy-two 14-month-olds and 22-month-olds were presented with novel target objects followed by test objects that varied in similarity to the target. Objects were introduced with a novel word or a novel gesture or with no label. When target and test objects were highly similar in shape, both 14- and 22-month-olds inferred that these objects shared a nonobvious property, regardless of whether the objects were labeled with a word or a gesture or with no label. When objects were labeled with the same word, both 14- and 22-month-olds generalized the nonobvious properties to objects that shared minimal perceptual similarity. Finally, when objects were labeled with the same gesture, 14-month-olds, but not 22-month-olds, generalized the nonobvious properties to objects that shared minimal perceptual similarity. These results indicate that 14-month-olds possess a more generalized symbolic system as they will rely on both words and gestures to guide their inferences. By 22-months of age, infants treat words as a privileged referential form when making inductive inferences.     

Embodied communication: Speakers’ gestures affect listeners’ actions

We explored how speakers and listeners use hand gestures as a source of perceptual-motor information during naturalistic communication. After solving the Tower of Hanoi task either with real objects or on a computer, speakers explained the task to listeners. Speakers’ hand gestures, but not their speech, reflected properties of the particular objects and the actions that they had previously used to solve the task. Speakers who solved the problem with real objects used more grasping handshapes and produced more curved trajectories during the explanation. Listeners who observed explanations from speakers who had previously solved the problem with real objects subsequently treated computer objects more like real objects; their mouse trajectories revealed that they lifted the objects in conjunction with moving them sideways, and this behavior was related to the particular gestures that were observed. These findings demonstrate that hand gestures are a reliable source of perceptual-motor information during human communication.     

Hands in the air: using ungrounded iconic gestures to teach children conservation of quantity

Including gesture in instruction facilitates learning. Why? One possibility is that gesture points out objects in the immediate context and thus helps ground the words learners hear in the world they see. Previous work on gesture's role in instruction has used gestures that either point to or trace paths on objects, thus providing support for this hypothesis. The experiments described here investigated the possibility that gesture helps children learn even when it is not produced in relation to an object but is instead produced "in the air." Children were given instruction in Piagetian conservation problems with or without gesture and with or without concrete objects. The results indicate that children given instruction with speech and gesture learned more about conservation than children given instruction with speech alone, whether or not objects were present during instruction. Gesture in instruction can thus help learners learn even when those gestures do not direct attention to visible objects, suggesting that gesture can do more for learners than simply ground arbitrary, symbolic language in the physical, observable world.     

Giving cognition a helping hand: The effect of congruent gestures on object name retrieval

The gestures that accompany speech are more than just arbitrary hand movements or communicative devices. They are simulated actions that can both prime and facilitate speech and cognition. This study measured participants’ reaction times for naming degraded images of objects when simultaneously adopting a gesture that was either congruent with the target object, incongruent with it, and when not making any hand gesture. A within‐subjects design was used, with participants (N= 122) naming 10 objects under each condition. Participants named the objects significantly faster when adopting a congruent gesture than when not gesturing at all. Adopting an incongruent gesture resulted in significantly slower naming times. The findings are discussed in the context of the intrapersonal cognitive and facilitatory effects of gestures and underline the relatedness between language, action, and cognition.     

How iconic gestures enhance communication: an ERP study

EEG was recorded as adults watched short segments of spontaneous discourse in which the speaker's gestures and utterances contained complementary information. Videos were followed by one of four types of picture probes: cross-modal related probes were congruent with both speech and gestures; speech-only related probes were congruent with information in the speech, but not the gesture; and two sorts of unrelated probes were created by pairing each related probe with a different discourse prime. Event-related potentials (ERPs) elicited by picture probes were measured within the time windows of the N300 (250-350 ms post-stimulus) and N400 (350-550 ms post-stimulus). Cross-modal related probes elicited smaller N300 and N400 than speech-only related ones, indicating that pictures were easier to interpret when they corresponded with gestures. N300 and N400 effects were not due to differences in the visual complexity of each probe type, since the same cross-modal and speech-only picture probes elicited N300 and N400 with similar amplitudes when they appeared as unrelated items. These findings extend previous research on gesture comprehension by revealing how iconic co-speech gestures modulate conceptualization, enabling listeners to better represent visuo-spatial aspects of the speaker's meaning.     

Language-based access to gestural components of conceptual knowledge

We report two experiments in which production of articulated hand gestures was used to reveal the nature of gestural knowledge evoked by sentences referring to manipulable objects. Two gesture types were examined: functional gestures (executed when using an object for its intended purpose) and volumetric gestures (used when picking up an object simply to move it). Participants read aloud a sentence that referred to an object but did not mention any form of manual interaction (e.g., Jane forgot the calculator) and were cued after a delay of 300 or 750 ms to produce the functional or volumetric gesture associated with the object, or a gesture that was unrelated to the object. At both cue delays, functional gestures were primed relative to unrelated gestures, but no significant priming was found for volumetric gestures. Our findings elucidate the types of motor representations that are directly linked to the meaning of words referring to manipulable objects in sentences.     

The role of gestures in spatial working memory and speech

Co-speech gestures traditionally have been considered communicative, but they may also serve other functions. For example, hand-arm movements seem to facilitate both spatial working memory and speech production. It has been proposed that gestures facilitate speech indirectly by sustaining spatial representations in working memory. Alternatively, gestures may affect speech production directly by activating embodied semantic representations involved in lexical search. Consistent with the first hypothesis, we found participants gestured more when describing visual objects from memory and when describing objects that were difficult to remember and encode verbally. However, they also gestured when describing a visually accessible object, and gesture restriction produced dysfluent speech even when spatial memory was untaxed, suggesting that gestures can directly affect both spatial memory and lexical retrieval.     

Do you understand what I want to tell you? Early sensitivity in bilinguals' iconic gesture perception and production

Previous research has shown differences in monolingual and bilingual communication. We explored whether monolingual and bilingual pre‐schoolers (N = 80) differ in their ability to understand others' iconic gestures (gesture perception) and produce intelligible iconic gestures themselves (gesture production) and how these two abilities are related to differences in parental iconic gesture frequency. In a gesture perception task, the experimenter replaced the last word of every sentence with an iconic gesture. The child was then asked to choose one of four pictures that matched the gesture as well as the sentence. In a gesture production task, children were asked to indicate ‘with their hands’ to a deaf puppet which objects to select. Finally, parental gesture frequency was measured while parents answered three different questions. In the iconic gesture perception task, monolingual and bilingual children did not differ. In contrast, bilinguals produced more intelligible gestures than their monolingual peers. Finally, bilingual children's parents gestured more while they spoke than monolingual children's parents. We suggest that bilinguals' heightened sensitivity to their interaction partner supports their ability to produce intelligible gestures and results in a bilingual advantage in iconic gesture production.