It is unknown whether animals, like humans, can employ behavioural strategies to cope with impulsivity. To examine this question, we tested whether chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) would use self-distraction as a coping strategy in a situation in which they had to continually inhibit responses to accumulating candies in order to earn a greater amount of those rewards. We tested animals in three conditions in which they were sometimes given a set of toys and were sometimes allowed physical access to the accumulating candies. Chimpanzees allowed the rewards to accumulate longer before responding when they could divert their attention to the toys, and they manipulated the toys more when the candies were physically accessible. Thus, chimpanzees engaged in self-distraction with the toys when such behaviour was most beneficial as a coping mechanism.

No abstract

Even with advances in automated testing techniques, the capuchin monkey (Cebus apella) can be a difficult species to test in the laboratory, given its social/behavioral tendencies and typical activity pattern. Laboratories that maintain social colonies of capuchin monkeys are able to separate and test individuals, but the process can be very effortful and time consuming, and the resulting data can be modest in quantity. The present article describes procedures and apparatuses that were used to train a colony of computer-naive capuchin monkeys to quickly and reliably isolate themselves from group members and interact with a computerized test system in order to produce a large volume of data. Several elements that were important in motivating the monkeys to participate are discussed.

Capuchin monkeys have been tested for the capacity to delay gratification for accumulating rewards in recent studies and have exhibited variable results. Meanwhile, chimpanzees have consistently excelled at this task. However, neither species have ever been tested at accumulating symbolic tokens instead of food items, even though previous reports indicate that tokens sometimes facilitate performance in other self-control tasks. Thus, in the present study, we tested capuchin monkeys and chimpanzees for their capacity to delay gratification in a delay maintenance task, in which an experimenter presented items, one at a time, to within reach of an animal for as long as the animal refrained from taking them. In Experiment 1, we assessed how long capuchin monkeys could accumulate items in the delay maintenance task when items were food rewards or tokens exchangeable for food rewards. Monkeys accumulated more food rewards than they did tokens. In Experiment 2, we tested capuchin monkeys and chimpanzees in a similar accumulation test. Whereas capuchins again accumulated more food than tokens, all chimpanzees but one showed no difference in performance in the two conditions. These findings provide additional evidence that chimpanzees exhibit greater self-control capacity in this task than do capuchin monkeys and indicate that symbolic stimuli fail to facilitate delay maintenance when they do not abstract away from the quantitative dimension of the task. This is consistent with previous findings on the effects of symbols on self-control and illuminates what makes accumulation a particularly challenging task.

Nonhuman animals reliably select the largest of two or more sets of discrete items, particularly if those items are food items. However, many studies of these numerousness judgments fail to control for confounds between amount of food e.g., mass or volume) and number of food items. Stimulus dimensions other than number of items also may play a role in how animals perceive sets and make choices. Four chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) completed a variety of tasks that involved comparisons of food items (graham crackers) that varied in terms of their number, size, and orientation. In Experiment 1, chimpanzees chose between two alternative sets of visible cracker pieces. In Experiment 2, the experimenters presented one set of crackers in a vertical orientation (stacked) and the other in a horizontal orientation. In Experiment 3, the experimenters presented all food items one-at-a-time by dropping them into opaque containers. Chimpanzees succeeded overall in choosing the largest amount of food. They did not rely on number or contour length as cues when making these judgments but instead primarily responded to the total amount of food in the sets. However, some errors reflected choices of the set with the smaller total amount of food but the individually largest single food item. Thus, responses were not optimal because of biases that were not related to the total amount of food in the sets.

The authors tested the self-control of rhesus macaques by assessing if they could refrain from reaching into a food container to maximize the accumulation of sequentially delivered food items (a delay-maintenance task). Three different versions of the task varied the quantity and quality of available food items. In the first 2 versions, food items accumulated across the length of the trial until a monkey consumed the items. In the 3rd task, a single less-preferred food item preceded a single more-preferred food item. Some monkeys delayed gratification even with relatively long delays between deliveries of items. However, the data suggested that self-control, in the majority of tested individuals, was not significantly different across different task versions and that self-control by macaques was not as prevalent in these tasks as it is in chimpanzees and human children.

Using techniques established by E. M. Brannon and H. S. Terrace (2000) with rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta), the authors tested the ability of brown capuchins (Cebus apella) to order arrays of items ranging in quantity from 1 to 9. Three monkeys were trained on a touch screen to select the quantities 1-4 in ascending order. The monkeys exhibited successful transfer of this ability to novel representations of the quantities 1-4 and to pairs of the novel quantities 5-9. Patterns of responding with respect to numeric distance and magnitude were similar to those seen in human subjects, suggesting the use of similar psychological processes. The capuchins demonstrated an ordinal representation of quantity equivalent to that shown in Old World monkeys.

Choosing to wait for a better outcome (delay choice) and sustaining the delay prior to that outcome (delay maintenance) are both prerequisites for successful self control in intertemporal choices. However, most existing experimental methods test these skills in isolation from each other, and no significant correlation has been observed in performance across these tasks. In this study we introduce a new paradigm, the hybrid delay task, which combines an initial delay choice with a subsequent delay maintenance stage. This allows testing how often choosing to wait is paired with the actual ability to do so. We tested 18 capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) from two laboratories in various conditions, and we found that subjects frequently chose the delayed reward but then failed to wait for it, due to poor delay maintenance. However, performance improved with experience and different behavioral responses for error correction were evident. These findings have far reaching implications: if such a high error rate was observed also in other species (possibly including Homo sapiens), this may indicate that delay choice tasks that make use of salient, prepotent stimuli do not reliably assess generalized self control, insofar as choosing to wait does not entail always being able to do so.