Inhibitory control and response selection in problem solving: how cotton-top tamarins (Saguinus oedipus) overcome a bias for selecting the larger quantity of food

When presented with a choice between 1 and 3 pieces of food in a type of reversed contingency task, 4 cotton-top tamarins (Saguinus oedipus) consistently chose the 3 pieces of food and received nothing, even though the choice of 1 piece would have yielded 3. However, in a task in which the tamarins received the 1 piece of food when they chose it, all subjects learned to select 1 over 3. Thus, the tamarins' prior failure on the reversed contingency task did not result entirely from an inherent inability to suppress the prepotent response of reaching to the larger of 2 quantities of food. After the experience of selecting the smaller quantity and receiving it, all of the tamarins solved the version of the reversed contingency task that they failed initially. These results suggest that the tamarins' initial failure may have reflected a difficulty with selecting an alternative response option.     

Mangabeys (<Emphasis Type="Italic">Cercocebus torquatus lunulatus</Emphasis>) solve the reverse contingency task without a modified procedure

Problem solving often relies on generating new responses while inhibiting others, particularly prepotent ones. A paradigm to study inhibitory abilities is the reverse contingency task (Boysen and Berntson in J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process 21:82–86, 1995), in which two different quantities of food are offered to an individual who receives the array he did not choose. Therefore, mastery of the task demands selecting the smaller quantity to obtain the larger one. Several non-human primates have been tested in the reverse contingency task. To date, only great apes and rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta) have succeeded in the original task, with no need of procedural modifications as the large-or-none contingency, correction trials or symbolic stimuli substituting for actual food quantities. Here, four mangabeys were presented with two stimulus arrays of one and four raisins in the context of the reverse contingency task. Three of them learned to perform the task well above chance without a modified procedure. They also reached above-chance performance when presented with two stimulus arrays of zero and four raisins, despite the initial difficulty of choosing a null quantity. After a period of 7–10 months, in which the animals were not tested on any task, all three subjects continued to perform well, even when presented with novel quantity pairs.     

How the great apes (Pan troglodytes, Pongo pygmaeus, Pan paniscus, and Gorilla gorilla) perform on the reversed contingency task: the effects of food quantity and food visibility

S. T. Boysen and G. G. Berntson (1995) found that chimpanzees performed poorly on a reversed contingency task in which they had to point to the smaller of 2 food quantities to acquire the larger quantity. The authors compared the performance of 4 great ape species (Pan troglodytes, Pongo pygmaeus, Pan paniscus, and Gorilla gorilla) on the reversed contingency task while manipulating food quantity (0-4 or 1-4) and food visibility (visible pairs or covered pairs). Results showed no systematic species differences but large individual differences. Some individuals of each species were able to solve the reversed contingency task. Both quantity and visibility of the food items had a significant effect on performance. Subjects performed better when the disparity between quantities was smaller and the quantities were not directly visible.     

What guides a search for food that has disappeared? Experiments on cotton-top tamarins (Saguinus oedipus).

When food is launched down a vertically positioned S-shaped opaque tube, cotton-top tamarins (Saguinus oedipus) search for the food in the position directly beneath the release point, even though over several trials it never appears in this position (B. M. Hood et al., 1999). Experiment 1 showed that when the trajectory of the food shifts from the vertical to the horizontal plane, tamarins no longer show systematic perseverative errors and, in general, perform better on this invisible displacement task. Experiment 2 showed that tamarins with experience on the horizontal task show less of a bias when tested on the vertical task but nonetheless fail overall to solve this invisible displacement problem; their performance is substantially worse than it was on the horizontal task. Experiment 3 revealed that when the vertically positioned tube is replaced by an occluded ramp, tamarins consistently search in the compartment below the release point, even though most of the tamarins had experience in Experiments 1 and 2. Overall, results indicate that tamarins have a significant gravity bias when searching for food that has disappeared along the vertical plane but also have more general problems finding food that has moved out of sight.     

A reversed-reward contingency task reveals causal knowledge in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes)

In the reversed-reward contingency task, subjects are required to choose the less preferred of two options in order to obtain the more preferred one. Usually, this task is used to measure inhibitory skills, but it could also be used to measure how strong the subjects’ preferences are. We presented chimpanzees with support tasks where only one of two paper strips could physically bring food into reach. Subjects were rewarded for choosing the non-functional strip. In Experiment 1, subjects failed to pick the non-baited strip. In Experiment 2, subjects failed to pick the broken strip. Chimpanzees performed worse in these tasks than in other similar tasks where instead of paper strips, there were similar shapes painted on a platform. The fact that subjects found the reversed-reward contingency task based on causality more difficult to solve than a perceptually similar task with no causality involved (i.e., arbitrary) suggests that they did not treat real strips as an arbitrary task. Instead, they must have had some causal knowledge of the support problem that made them prefer functional over non-functional strips despite the contrary reward regime.     

Working Wonders? Investigating insight with magic tricks

We propose a new approach to differentiate between insight and noninsight problem solving, by introducing magic tricks as problem solving domain. We argue that magic tricks are ideally suited to investigate representational change, the key mechanism that yields sudden insight into the solution of a problem, because in order to gain insight into the magicians’ secret method, observers must overcome implicit constraints and thus change their problem representation. In Experiment 1, 50 participants were exposed to 34 different magic tricks, asking them to find out how the trick was accomplished. Upon solving a trick, participants indicated if they had reached the solution either with or without insight. Insight was reported in 41.1% of solutions. The new task domain revealed differences in solution accuracy, time course and solution confidence with insight solutions being more likely to be true, reached earlier, and obtaining higher confidence ratings. In Experiment 2, we explored which role self-imposed constraints actually play in magic tricks. 62 participants were presented with 12 magic tricks. One group received verbal cues, providing solution relevant information without giving the solution away. The control group received no informative cue. Experiment 2 showed that participants’ constraints were suggestible to verbal cues, resulting in higher solution rates. Thus, magic tricks provide more detailed information about the differences between insightful and noninsightful problem solving, and the underlying mechanisms that are necessary to have an insight.     

Colour versus quantity as cues in reverse-reward-competent squirrel monkeys (Saimiri sciureus)

To assess the relative salience of colour and quantity cues, squirrel monkeys previously trained to reach for the smaller of two quantities of food in a reverse-reward contingency task received colour discrimination training. After initial failure to discriminate between two colours of dots under a differential reinforcement regime, they learned the task when the S- colour was associated with zero reward. The monkeys then showed good retention on the original reverse-reward task of 1 versus 4 with pairs of dots presented in S+ or S- colours. However, on "mismatch" trials of 1S- versus 4S+ , only 2 of 4 monkeys tested showed a preference--1 monkey chose based on quantity, the other based on colour. Individual differences and the possible roles of overshadowing and blocking are discussed.     

Are dogs (<Emphasis Type="Italic">Canis familiaris</Emphasis>) misled more by their owners than by strangers in a food choice task?

Dogs are highly skilled in understanding a large variety of human social cues and use them appropriately to solve a number of different cognitive tasks. They rely on human signals even when these are contradictory or misleading and ultimately prevent them from correctly solving a task. In the following two experiments, we investigated whether the owner and a stranger differently influenced dogs’ choices in food discrimination tasks. In Experiment 1, 48 dogs were tested in 3 different conditions: (1) choice between a large and a small amount of dog pellets with no demonstration; (2) choice between a large and a small amount of dog pellets after having witnessed the owner/stranger favouring the small quantity; (3) choice between two single food pellets after observing the owner/stranger choosing one of them. In Experiment 2, 48 dogs could choose between two foods of different palatability: in Condition 1, dogs chose between a slice of sausage and a dry pellet with no demonstration. In Condition 2, the same choice was available but with a person (owner/stranger) showing a preference for the dry pellet. In Condition 3, dogs chose between a single dry pellet and 8 slices of sausage, with the person (owner/stranger) showing a preference for the pellet. In both experiments, dogs conformed to the human’s indications even though these led to the selection of the less advantageous option (i.e. the smaller amount of food in Experiment 1 or the low quality food in Experiment 2). However, the owner and the stranger did not differently influence the dogs’ behaviour. Results show that dogs are willing to follow a person’s indication even when this is visibly (if perhaps only mildly) counterproductive to them and that they are socially prepared to rely equally on cues given by the owner and an unfamiliar friendly person.     

Colour versus quantity as cues in reverse-reward-competent squirrel monkeys (Saimiri sciureus)

To assess the relative salience of colour and quantity cues, squirrel monkeys previously trained to reach for the smaller of two quantities of food in a reverse-reward contingency task received colour discrimination training. After initial failure to discriminate between two colours of dots under a differential reinforcement regime, they learned the task when the S? colour was associated with zero reward. The monkeys then showed good retention on the original reverse-reward task of 1 versus 4 with pairs of dots presented in S + or S? colours. However, on “mismatch” trials of 1S? versus 4S + , only 2 of 4 monkeys tested showed a preference—1 monkey chose based on quantity, the other based on colour. Individual differences and the possible roles of overshadowing and blocking are discussed.     

More or less: spontaneous quantity discrimination in the domestic cat

We examined spontaneous quantity discrimination in untrained domestic cats in three food choice experiments. In Experiment 1, we presented the cats with two different quantities of food in eight numerical combinations. Overall, the subjects chose the larger quantity more often than the smaller one, and significantly so when the ratio between the quantities was less than 0.5. In Experiment 2, we presented the cats with two pieces of food in four different size combinations. Again, subjects chose the larger piece above chance, although not in the combination where the largest item was presented. In Experiment 3, a subset of the cats was presented multiple times with two different quantities of food, which were hidden from view. In this case, the cats did not choose the larger quantity more often than the smaller one, suggesting that in the present experiments they mainly used visual cues when comparing quantities. We conclude that domestic cats are capable of spontaneously discriminating quantities when faced with different numbers or sizes of food items, and we suggest why they may not always be motivated to choose the larger quantity. In doing so, we highlight the advantages of testing spontaneous choice behavior, which is more likely to reflect animals’ everyday manner of responding than is the case when training them in order to test their absolute limits of performance which may not always coincide with their daily needs.     

Probing the limits of tool competence: Experiments with two non-tool-using species (Cercopithecus aethiops and Saguinus oedipus)

Non-human animals vary in their ability to make and use tools. The goal of the present study was to further explore what, if anything, differs between tool-users and non-tool-users, and whether these differences lie in the conceptual or motor domain. We tested two species that typically do not use tools-cotton top tamarins (Saguinus oedipus) and vervet monkeys (Cercopithecus aethiops)-on problems that mirrored those designed for prolific tool users such as chimpanzees. We trained subjects on a task in which they could choose one of two canes to obtain an out-of-reach food reward. After training, subjects received several variations on the original task, each designed to examine a specific conceptual aspect of the pulling problem previously studied in other tool-using species. Both species recognized that effective pulling tools must be made of rigid materials. Subsequent conditions revealed significant species differences, with vervets outperforming tamarins across many conditions. Vervets, but not tamarins, had some recognition of the relationship between a tool's orientation and the position of the food reward, the relationship between a tool's trajectory and the substance that it moves on, and that tools must be connected in order to work properly. These results provide further evidence that tool-use may derive from domain-general, rather than domain-specific cognitive capacities that evolved for tool use per se.     

Self-Control and Impulsiveness in Adult Human Females: Effects of Food Preferences

Two experiments explored the effects of food preferences on humans’ choice in a self-control paradigm. Reinforcers consisted of programmed periods of access time to drinking juice during the experimental session. Experiment 1 used 14 adult women and Experiment 2 used 9 adult women. In Experiment 1, the women demonstrated significantly less sensitivity to reinforcer amount relative to sensitivity to reinforcer delay (a measure of self-control) when they reported a higher preference for the juice received as the less delayed, smaller reinforcer than for the juice received as the more delayed, larger reinforcer. Conversely in Experiment 2, the women demonstrated significantly more sensitivity to reinforcer amount relative to sensitivity to reinforcer delay when they reported a higher preference for the juice received as the more delayed, larger reinforcer than for the juice received as the less delayed, smaller reinforcer. Together, the results show that participants’ food preferences can influence self-control for food reinforcers.     

Reverse-reward learning in squirrel monkeys (Saimiri sciureus): retesting after 5 years, and assessment on qualitative transfer

Seven squirrel monkeys (Saimiri sciureus) previously trained on reverse-reward tasks were presented with the original "1-versus-4" task after a 5-year interval without reverse-reward experience (Experiment 1). None of them reliably selected the smaller food array; however, at around chance level, their performance was superior to when they were first exposed to the task almost 6 years previously, suggesting some long-term memory retention. One naive monkey consistently selected the larger array, as expected. In Experiment 2, trials consisting of 1 versus 1 piece of two qualitatively different types of food were interspersed among familiar 1-versus-4 trials. None of five monkeys tested reliably selected the less-preferred food to get the more preferred food as the reward, and one monkey scored below chance. However, when one piece of low-preference food was paired with four pieces of high-preference food (Experiment 3), all four monkeys tested avoided reaching for the latter and thereby obtained it as the reward; two monkeys obtained perfect scores on these trials. These two monkeys were trained on a specific qualitative reverse-reward pairing and then again tested on new pairings (Experiment 4), but transfer was incomplete. Compound trials that pit quantity against quality in novel ways appear taxing for squirrel monkeys, despite competence in reverse-reward on both dimensions separately.     

Motivated information processing, strategic choice, and the quality of negotiated agreement

The authors tested a motivated information-processing model of negotiation: To reach high joint outcomes, negotiators need a deep understanding of the task, which requires them to exchange information and to process new information systematically. All this depends on social motivation, epistemic motivation (EM), and their interaction. Indeed, when EM (manipulated by holding negotiators process accountability or not) was high rather than low and prosocial rather than proself, negotiators recall more cooperative than competitive tactics (Experiment 1), had more trust, and reached higher joint outcomes (Experiment 2). Experiment 3 showed that under high EM, negotiators who received cooperative, rather than competitive, tactics reached higher joint outcomes because they engaged in more problem solving. Under low EM, negotiators made more concessions and reached low joint outcomes. Implications for negotiation theory and for future work in this area are discussed.     

Squirrel monkeys (Saimiri sciureus) choose smaller food arrays: long-term retention, choice with nonpreferred food, and transposition

Squirrel monkeys (Saimiri sciureus) that had learned to reach toward 1 piece of food instead of 4 in a reverse-reward contingency were tested after an 8-month delay with no intervening relevant experiences. All monkeys except 1 continued to show inhibitory control by reliably reaching toward the smaller quantity, most of them doing so within 2 sessions. Performance was maintained when a low-preference food replaced prized foods as arrays and rewards. When the quantities 1 and 4 were replaced with different ones, there was strong evidence of transposition at group level, although individual differences in bias toward the smaller quantities became apparent. Individual differences in mastering the original task more than 8 months previously were quite stable, suggesting robustness in the operations required for this form of self-control.     

Can squirrel monkeys (Saimiri sciureus) learn self-control? A study using food array selection tests and reverse-reward contingency

Eight squirrel monkeys (Saimiri sciureus) were presented with 2 stimulus arrays, namely 1 and 4 pieces of food, but they received only the array other than the one they reached for. In this reverse-reward condition, all monkeys initially showed a strong preference for the larger array. One monkey learned to reach toward the smaller array when a large-or-none reward contingency was applied (i.e., no reward followed a reach toward the larger array, but this array was given for a reach toward the smaller array). When correction trials and time-out were added to the large-or-none procedure, all remaining monkeys except 1 learned this form of self-control. Performance was maintained when correction trials were discontinued, the original reverse-reward condition was rerun, and novel array-size pairs were presented. This study demonstrates one form of self-control in a New World primate and shows the reverse-reward procedure to be a potentially valuable method for assessing species and individual differences in self-control and numerosity-related abilities.     

Use of experimenter-given cues in visual co-orienting and in an object-choice task by a new world monkey species, cotton top tamarins (Saguinus oedipus)

Two methods assessed the use of experimenter-given directional cues by a New World monkey species, cotton top tamarins (Saguinus oedipus). Experiment 1 used cues to elicit visual co-orienting toward distal objects. Experiment 2 used cues to generate responses in an object-choice task. Although there were strong positive correlations between monkey pairs to co-orient, visual co-orienting with a human experimenter occurred at a low frequency to distal objects. Human hand pointing cues generated more visual co-orienting than did eye gaze to distal objects. Significant accurate choices of baited cups occurred with human point and tap cues and human look cues. Results highlight the importance of head and body orientation to induce shared attention in cotton top tamarins, both in a task that involved food getting and a task that did not.     

Foraging behaviour in domestic pigs (Sus scrofa): remembering and prioritizing food sites of different value

This experiment investigated whether domestic pigs can remember the locations of food sites of different relative value, and how a restricted retrieval choice affects their foraging behaviour. Nine juvenile female pigs were trained to relocate two food sites out of a possible eight in a spatial memory task. The two baited sites contained different amounts of food and an obstacle was added to the smaller amount to increase handling time. On each trial, a pig searched for the two baited sites (search visit). Once it had found and eaten the bait, it returned for a second (relocation) visit, in which the two same sites were baited. Baited sites were changed between trials. All subjects learnt the task. When allowed to retrieve both baits, the subjects showed no preference for retrieving a particular one first (experiment 1). When they were allowed to retrieve only one bait, a significant overall preference for retrieving the larger amount emerged across subjects (experiment 2). To test whether this preference reflected an avoidance of the obstacle with the smaller bait, 15 choice-restricted control trials were conducted. In control trials obstacles were present with both baits. Pigs continued to retrieve the larger bait, indicating they had discriminated between the two food sites on the basis of quantity or profitability and adjusted their behaviour accordingly when the relocation choice was restricted. This suggests for the first time that domestic pigs have the ability to discriminate between food sites of different relative value and to remember their respective locations.     

Self-control and impulsiveness in children and adults: Effects of food preferences

Experiment 1 used 6 preschool boys and Experiment 2 used 6 adult women to explore the effects of food preference on humans' choice in self-control paradigms. The boys showed a higher proportion of responses for more delayed, larger reinforcers (a measure of self-control) when those choices resulted in receipt of the most preferred food compared to when those choices resulted in the least preferred food. Further, the boys chose the less delayed, smaller reinforcers significantly more often when only those choices, as opposed to both choices, resulted in the most preferred food. Conversely, they chose the more delayed, larger reinforcers significantly more often when only those choices, as opposed to both choices, resulted in the most preferred food. Finally, the women demonstrated significantly less sensitivity to reinforcer amount relative to sensitivity to reinforcer delay (another measure of self-control) when they had a higher preference for the juice received as the less delayed, smaller reinforcer than for the juice received as the more delayed, larger reinforcer. Together, the results show that subjects' food preferences can influence self-control for food reinforcers.     

Donor payoffs and other-regarding preferences in cotton-top tamarins (Saguinus oedipus)

Helping others at no cost to oneself is a simple way to demonstrate other-regarding preferences. Yet, primates exhibit mixed results for other-regarding preferences: chimpanzees and tamarins do not show these effects, whereas capuchin monkeys and marmosets preferentially give food to others. One factor of relevance to this no-cost food donation is the payoff to the donor. Though donors always receive the same payoffs regardless of their choice, previous work varies in whether they receive either a food reward or no food reward. Here, I tested cotton-top tamarins in a preferential giving task. Subjects could choose from two tools, one of which delivered food to a partner in an adjacent cage and the other of which delivered food to an empty cage. Thus, subjects could preferentially give or withhold food from a partner. I varied whether subjects received food payoffs, whether a partner was present or absent, and whether the partner was a non-cagemate or the subject’s mate. Results showed that the subjects’ overall motivation to pull either tool declined when they did not receive any food. Additionally, they did not preferentially donate or withhold food, regardless of their own payoff or their relationship with the partner. Thus, cotton-top tamarins do not take advantage of cost-free food giving, either when they might gain in the future (mates) or when they have no opportunity for future interactions (non-cagemates).