Cognitive control under social influence in baboons.

Abstract

From cockroaches to human beings, the presence of other members of the same species typically facilitates dominant (habitual/well-learned) responses regardless of their contextual relevance. This social facilitation requires special attention in animal species such as primates, given their evolved cognitive control mechanisms. Here we tested baboons who freely engaged in (computer-based) conflict response tasks requiring cognitive control for successful performance, and discovered that social presence does not only enhance dominant responses but also consumes cognitive control resources. Under social presence, the baboons experienced greater cognitive conflicts, were less able to inhibit a learned action in favor of a new one, and were also less able to take advantage of previous experience with response conflict, compared with isolation. These findings explain why inappropriate behaviors are not easily suppressed in primates acting in social contexts, and indicate a greater demand for cognitive control in social groups. This extra demand might represent a major evolutionary drive of human intelligence.

Is mental effort exertion contagious?

“…More specifically, performance on a simple, low-level motor task improves in the presence of observers (Travis, 1925), whereas performance on a difficult test-battery assessing executive functioning worsens in the presence of a third-party observer (Horwitz & McCaffrey, 2008; for a seminal meta-analysis, see Bond & Titus, 1983). In line with this, recent studies have shown that performance on a conflict task assessing executive functioning decreases in the presence of others who are executing the same task (Huguet, Barbet, Belletier, Monteil, & Fagot, 2014), suggesting that the presence of these others taxes our cognitive control capacity (see also Conty, Gimmig, Belletier, George, & Huguet, 2010).…”

Using Automated Learning Devices for Monkeys (ALDM) to study social networks

“…As a first step, we defined proximity by the presence at the same time of two individuals in the same trailer (as in Huguet et al, 2014). therefore, up to three ALDM units could separate two individuals considered to be in association (the effect of limiting the measure of association to individuals that were closer is studied below).…”

“…S1). The present study was also motivated by the fact that previous results had shown that baboons who can freely participate in cognitive testing tend to be influenced by the presence of others (Huguet, Barbet, Belletier, Monteil, & Fagot, 2014). suggesting that they form nonrandom associations when they participate in cognitive tests.…”

“…In the preceding sections, individuals were considered to be associated on the basis of their co-presence in a trailer (as in Huguet et al, 2014). Since five ALDM test systems were installed within each trailer, this initial measure only provided a crude measurement of spatial proximity.…”

Choking under monitoring pressure: being watched by the experimenter reduces executive attention

“…When attending to others is incompatible with the task demands, attentional conflict may ensue, a form of response conflict regarding what attentional response one should make (Baron, 1986;Huguet, Barbet, Belletier, Monteil, & Fagot, 2014;Huguet, Dumas, & Monteil, 2004;Huguet, Galvaing, Monteil, & Dumas, 1999;Muller & Butera, 2007;Normand, Bouquet, & Croizet, 2014;Sharma, Booth, Brown, & Huguet, 2010). This conflict, in turn, may lead to poor performance on difficult or attentiondemanding tasks.…”