Delay of gratification by orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus) in the accumulation task.

Parrish, Audrey E.; Perdue, Bonnie M.; Stromberg, Erin E.; Bania, Amanda E.; Evans, Theodore A.; Beran, Michael J.

doi:10.1037/a0035660

Cited by 31 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 40 publications

(48 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Second, the results indicated that delay maintenance was driven not by the number of items obtained but instead by the delay interval. This is an important outcome, as it matches other previous work using intertemporal choice tasks with monkeys (e.g., Evans et al 2014) and also the accumulation task with orangutans (Parrish et al, 2014), and this highlights that improving self-control in this species will likely progress better when attention is paid to delay intervals rather than food amounts. Third, and perhaps most impressively, we documented that this group of monkeys now showed much stronger self-control in a task that they had not performed well at in earlier.…”

Section: 1 Experimentssupporting

confidence: 85%

“…This test, called the accumulation task, was first used with human children (e.g., Toner and Smith, 1977) and was later adapted for use with nonhuman animals (Beran, 2002). Some species are quite successful with this task, particularly the great apes (Beran, 2002; Beran and Evans, 2006; Evans and Beran, 2007a; Parrish et al, 2014; Stevens, Rosati, Heilbronner, and Mühlhoff, 2011). Other species such as monkeys (e.g., Anderson, Kuroshima, and Fujita, 2010; Evans and Beran, 2007b) and African Grey Parrots (Vick, Bovet, and Anderson, 2010; but see Koepke, Gray, & Pepperberg, 2015) do not maintain the same degree of delay maintenance that is shown by apes in the accumulation task.…”

Section: 1 Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Self-control assessments of capuchin monkeys with the rotating tray task and the accumulation task

Beran

Perdue

Rossettie

et al. 2016

Behavioural Processes

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent studies of delay of gratification in capuchin monkeys using a rotating tray (RT) task have shown improved self-control performance in these animals in comparison to the accumulation (AC) task. In this study, we investigated whether this improvement resulted from the difference in methods between the rotating tray task and previous tests, or whether it was the result of greater overall experience with delay of gratification tasks. Experiment 1 produced similar performance levels by capuchins monkeys in the RT and AC tasks when identical reward and temporal parameters were used. Experiment 2 demonstrated a similar result using reward amounts that were more similar to previous AC experiments with these monkeys. In Experiment 3, monkeys performed multiple versions of the AC task with varied reward and temporal parameters. Their self-control behavior was found to be dependent on the overall delay to reward consumption, rather than the overall reward amount ultimately consumed. These findings indicate that these capuchin monkeys’ self-control capacities were more likely to have improved across studies because of the greater experience they had with delay of gratification tasks. Experiment 4 and Experiment 5 tested new, task-naïve monkeys on both tasks, finding more limited evidence of self-control, and no evidence that one task was more beneficial than the other in promoting self-control. The results of this study suggest that future testing of this kind should focus on temporal parameters and reward magnitude parameters to establish accurate measures of delay of gratification capacity and development in this species and perhaps others.

show abstract

Section: 1 Experimentssupporting

confidence: 85%

Section: 1 Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Self-control assessments of capuchin monkeys with the rotating tray task and the accumulation task

Beran

Perdue

Rossettie

et al. 2016

Behavioural Processes

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In a less commonly used self-control task, animals choose when to take an amount of food that grows over time as additional items are added to it one by one (e.g., Anderson et al 2010;Beran 2002;Beran and Evans 2006;Parrish et al 2014;Vick et al 2010). Such accumulation (ACC) tasks have been presented to fewer species, with a larger focus on nonhuman primates.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Waiting for what comes later: capuchin monkeys show self-control even for nonvisible delayed rewards

et al. 2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Self-control tasks used with nonhuman animals typically involve the choice between an immediate option and a delayed, but more preferred option. However, in many self-control scenarios, not only does the more impulsive option come sooner in time, it is often more concrete than the delayed option. For example, studies have presented children with the option of eating a visible marshmallow immediately, or foregoing it for a better reward that can only be seen later. Thus, the immediately available option is visible and concrete, whereas the delayed option is not visible and more abstract. We tested eight capuchin monkeys to better understand this potential effect by manipulating the visibility of the response options and the visibility of the baiting itself. Monkeys observed two food items (20 or 5 g pieces of banana) each being placed either on top of or inside of one of the two opaque containers attached to a revolving tray apparatus, either in full view of monkeys or occluded by a barrier. Trials ended when monkeys removed a reward from the rotating tray. To demonstrate self-control, monkeys should have allowed the smaller piece of food to pass if the larger piece was forthcoming. Overall, monkeys were successful on the task, allowing a smaller, visible piece of banana to pass from reach in order to access the larger, nonvisible banana piece. This was true even when the entire baiting process took place out of sight of the monkeys. This finding suggests that capuchin monkeys succeed on self-control tasks even when the delayed option is also more abstract than the immediate one-a situation likely faced by primates in everyday life.

show abstract

“…This is particularly true for research using intertemporal choice tasks, in which subjects make a discrete smaller-sooner versus larger-later choice (e.g., Ainslie, 1974;Berns, Laibson, Loewenstein, 2007;Deluty, 1978;Green, Myerson, Holt, Slevin, & Estle, 2004;Logue, 1988;Logue & Chavarro, 1987;Navarick & Fantino, 1976;Rachlin & Green, 1972;Stevens, Hallinan, & Hauser, 2005;Stevens & Mühlhoff, 2012;Tobin, Chelonis, & Logue, 1993;van Haaren, van Hest, & van de Poll, 1988). However, nonhuman animals also have performed a variety of other tasks, including delay of gratification tasks (e.g., Anderson, Kuroshima, & Fujita, 2010;Beran, 2002;Beran & Evans, 2006;Beran, SavageRumbaugh, Pate, & Rumbaugh, 1999;Brucks, Soliani, Range, & Marshall-Pescini, 2017;Evans & Beran, 2007;Evans, Beran, Paglieri, & Addessi, 2012;Grosch & Neuringer, 1981;Hillemann, Bugnyar, Kotrschal, & Wascher, 2014;Koepke, Gray, & Pepperberg, 2015;Parrish et al, 2014;Stevens, Rosati, Heilbronner, & Mühlhoff, 2011), food exchange tasks Dufour, Pelé, Sterck, & Thierry, 2007;Pelé, Dufour, Micheletta, & Thierry, 2010;Pelé, Micheletta, Uhlrich, Thierry, & Dufour, 2011;Ramseyer, Pelé, Dufour, Chauvin, & Thierry, 2006), token exchange tasks (e.g., Bourjade, Thierry, Call, & Dufour, 2012;Hackenberg & Vaidya, 2003;Judge & Essler, 2013;Parrish, Evans, Perdue, & Beran, 2013), and other tasks in which a more immediately available reward has to be avoide...…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We included two self-control tasks that are well known in the comparative literature and commonly used for assessing self-control in primates. The first task was the accumulation task in which food items were presented one at a time until the animal retrieved and consumed the items Beran, 2002;Beran & Evans, 2006;Evans & Beran, 2007;Parrish et al, 2014;Stevens et al, 2011;Vick, Bovet, & Anderson, 2010). The dependent measure of self-control was the number of items that an animal accumulated before consuming a food item.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigating the depletion effect: Self-control does not waiver in capuchin monkeys

Parrish¹,

James²,

Rossettie³

et al. 2018

AB&C

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-The ego-depletion hypothesis states that self-control diminishes over time and with exertion. However, there is mixed evidence among human adult and comparative studies as to whether such depletion occurs. It is an important issue, given that evidence for or against this hypothesis could have implications for remediation efforts with individuals who show high impulsivity and low self-control. In a study of potential depletion effects on selfcontrol, capuchin monkeys were presented with two consecutive self-control tasks back-to-back within sessions. Monkeys first completed the accumulation task, in which they were presented with food items one-by-one until the subject retrieved and ate the accumulating items, at which point no more food would be delivered. This required continual inhibition of food retrieval in the face of an increasingly desirable reward. Then, monkeys completed a food exchange task with exchange combinations that either decreased or increased in food quality. Self-control was required in foregoing eating an immediately available food for a potentially better reward later in the trial. Individual differences in accumulation performance were observed, but no depletion effects were seen in the monkeys' exchange performance. Next, monkeys were presented with task order counterbalanced across individuals. No order effects were observed in the monkeys' performance on either self-control task. Monkeys' exchange performance was not significantly correlated with accumulation performance in either experiment. These results indicate no depletion effects and that these tasks may not be related in terms of underlying mechanisms that support self-control performance, even though at face value both require inhibition of eating available food.Keywords -Self-control; Ego-depletion; Capuchin monkey; Accumulation task; Food exchange; Delay of gratification In many circumstances, individuals are faced with a choice between something fairly good now (e.g., a small amount of money or a small treat) or something better later (e.g., a larger amount of money or a larger treat). In these circumstances, self-control is required to forego the immediate reward so as to instead experience a later, but better reward at a future time. Because mishaps of self-control carry steep consequences in today's society (e.g., drug abuse, addiction, gambling, criminal behavior, and social misfortunes), there is an extensive literature devoted to understanding the mechanisms underlying selfcontrol and the factors that lead to its success for some and its failures for others (e.g., Baumeister,

show abstract

Delay of gratification by orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus) in the accumulation task.

Cited by 31 publications

References 40 publications

Self-control assessments of capuchin monkeys with the rotating tray task and the accumulation task

Self-control assessments of capuchin monkeys with the rotating tray task and the accumulation task

Waiting for what comes later: capuchin monkeys show self-control even for nonvisible delayed rewards

Investigating the depletion effect: Self-control does not waiver in capuchin monkeys

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About