Studying primate cognition in a social setting to improve validity and welfare: a literature review highlighting successful approaches

Abstract

BackgroundStudying animal cognition in a social setting is associated with practical and statistical challenges. However, conducting cognitive research without disturbing species-typical social groups can increase ecological validity, minimize distress, and improve animal welfare. Here, we review the existing literature on cognitive research run with primates in a social setting in order to determine how widespread such testing is and highlight approaches that may guide future research planning.Survey MethodologyUsing Google Scholar to search the terms “primate” “cognition” “experiment” and “social group,” we conducted a systematic literature search covering 16 years (2000–2015 inclusive). We then conducted two supplemental searches within each journal that contained a publication meeting our criteria in the original search, using the terms “primate” and “playback” in one search and the terms “primate” “cognition” and “social group” in the second. The results were used to assess how frequently nonhuman primate cognition has been studied in a social setting (>3 individuals), to gain perspective on the species and topics that have been studied, and to extract successful approaches for social testing.ResultsOur search revealed 248 unique publications in 43 journals encompassing 71 species. The absolute number of publications has increased over years, suggesting viable strategies for studying cognition in social settings. While a wide range of species were studied they were not equally represented, with 19% of the publications reporting data for chimpanzees. Field sites were the most common environment for experiments run in social groups of primates, accounting for more than half of the results. Approaches to mitigating the practical and statistical challenges were identified.DiscussionThis analysis has revealed that the study of primate cognition in a social setting is increasing and taking place across a range of environments. This literature review calls attention to examples that may provide valuable models for researchers wishing to overcome potential practical and statistical challenges to studying cognition in a social setting, ultimately increasing validity and improving the welfare of the primates we study.

Evaluating mood changes in response to anthropogenic noise with a response-slowing task in three species of zoo-housed primates

“…Whether other loud events that are common to zoo environments, such as special events for donors or concerts, have an effect on the mood of zoo animals remains to be determined. This report also demonstrates the feasibility of voluntary cognitive testing in three primate species without isolating subjects from their social group, which can increase the feasibility and validity of cognitive testing (Cronin, Jacobson, Bonnie, & Hopper, 2017). With further development, the response-slowing paradigm used here may be an effective and feasible way to evaluate real-time changes in the mood of zoo-housed animals under a variety of circumstances.…”

Social Models Enhance Apes’ Memory for Novel Events

“…Since we were interested in the feasibility of passively testing the subjects while they remained in their social groups, their participation was voluntary but also dependent on the social dynamics of their group32. Access to the eye tracker proved easier for the chimpanzees, who were willing to watch the stimuli and then move away when their turn was over, allowing multiple group members to participate.…”

Curious creatures: a multi-taxa investigation of responses to novelty in a zoo environment

“…Repeated studies using different populations would assist in reducing this issue however, in the zoo environment this is unavoidable. It must also be mentioned that there are many limitations when testing a group of animals together such as a lack of experimental control, differential access to the objects, reduced accuracy in large groups ( Cronin et al, 2017 ) and social influences ( Arakawa, 2006 ; Stöwe et al, 2006 ; Frost et al, 2007 ). However, evaluating animals in their everyday environment can reduce external modifiers such as unfamiliar environments which can reduce the validity of the results ( Cronin et al, 2017 ; Richter, Garner & Würbel, 2009 ).…”