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.     

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

Animal Cognition - 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...     

Vocal–gestural combinations in infant bonobos: new insights into signal functional specificity

Animal Cognition - Comparing the communicative abilities of humans and great apes is a commonly used research strategy to understand the evolutionary foundation of modern human language. The...     

Can lemurs learn to deceive? A study in the black lemur (Eulemur macaco)

Deceptive behavior in primates has been the focus of a number of studies. Nevertheless, such abilities have never been demonstrated in prosimians. The authors' goal was to analyze possible deception in lemurs according to a paradigm used with simians. Three black lemurs were trained to communicate about the location of a hidden reward with a cooperative trainer. Afterward, when a 2nd trainer and lemurs competed to gain access to the reward, each subject differentially adapted its learned behavior to the context. Their performances with the cooperative trainer remained stable while they showed various behavioral adjustments when faced to the competitive trainer: 1 subject refused to participate, another preferentially withheld information, and the 3rd sometimes pointed deceptively to obtain the reward.     

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.     

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.     

Transfer of self-control in black (Eulemur macaco) and brown (Eulemur fulvus) lemurs: choice of a less preferred food item under a reverse-reward contingency

When presented a choice between two food-type arrays of equivalent size under a reverse-reward contingency, black (Eulemur macaco) and brown (Eulemur fulvus) lemurs transposed their self-control abilities, acquired in a previous experiment, to significantly select the less-desired food item in order to gain access to the more desired one. However, when presented with the choice between two different food-type arrays in which the amount of the less desired food array was larger than the more desired one, large individual differences were revealed: Some subjects established a consistent rule favoring quality or quantity, whereas others exhibited various point of trade-off. These results show that lemurs seem to manage the task considering not only food quantity but also food quality.     

Time preferences in long-tailed macaques (Macaca fascicularis) and humans (Homo sapiens)

Rosati et al. (Curr Biol 17(19):1663–1668, 2007) found in a self-control test in which choice was between a smaller, immediately delivered food and a larger, delayed food, that chimpanzees preferred the larger reward (self-control); humans, however, preferred the smaller reward (impulsivity). They attributed their results to a species difference in self-control. In Experiment 1, monkeys (long-tailed macaques) were exposed to a self-control task in two conditions: where the food was hidden under differently colored bowls and where it was visible. When these two conditions were compared, choice shifted from greater preference for the impulsive alternative in the hidden condition to greater preference for the self-control alternative in the visible condition. Additionally, in both conditions, preference shifted from self-control to impulsivity over sessions. These results were explained in terms of the reversed-contingency effect (a propensity to reach for more over less when rewards are visible) and not to a capacity for self-control. In Experiment 2, humans that demonstrated preference for more over less in choice preferred the impulsive alternative when choice to either alternative was followed by the same intertrial interval—a preference that accelerates trial rates relative to preference of the self-control alternative. When trial rates were equated so that neither choice accelerated session’s end, humans demonstrated self-control. These results suggest that Rosati et al.’s demonstration of impulsivity in humans was due to participants’ desire to minimize session time.     

Revisiting the changing and stable properties of coping utilization using latent class growth analysis: A longitudinal investigation with soccer referees

ObjectivesThis study examined the longitudinal factor invariance of problem-focused, disengagement-focused, and seeking social support coping to provide an unbiased estimation of the mean-level and differential stability of coping with longitudinal confirmatory factor analyses with mean structure. This study also examined different patterns of longitudinal coping utilization with Latent Class Growth Modeling (LCGM).MethodSoccer referees (N = 227), aged from 15 to 53 years, completed a French version of the Ways of Coping Checklist at three times over an entire season.ResultsThe structure of the coping dimensions could be assumed longitudinally invariant. The mean-level utilization of problem-focused coping did not change significantly over the season despite the presence of test–retest instability. Both disengagement and seeking support coping utilization have significantly decreased over time while displaying moderate test–retest stability. Results of LCGM revealed that, while most referees did not change their utilization of problem-focused coping, two subgroups have respectively increased and decreased their use of problem-focused coping. Two subgroups decreased significantly their use of both disengagement-oriented and seeking support coping whereas one subgroup maintained the same level of utilization.ConclusionsResults indicated that coping utilization displayed both trait-like and state-like properties, differing for distinct subgroups of referees. This research provided further evidence for the need of moving beyond the sole reliance on traditional analyses of change to recast the trait-like versus state-like debate on coping into a more idiosyncratic-nomothetic framework.