Using multiple joystick systems in computerised enrichment for captive orangutans

Abstract

It has been suggested that providing multiple computers with automatic reward dispensers as enrichment to captive orangutans (Pongo spp) (as opposed to a single computer, with a care-staff person delivering reinforcers) might help improve behavioural outcomes. The purpose of the current study was to test this hypothesis by providing two computers with automatic reward dispensers to eight orangutans housed in four male-female pairs at Zoo Atlanta, USA. Subjects were observed for ten days during each of three phases: a baseline phase (during which, no computer was provided); immediately followed by Phase 1 (during which, one computer system was provided to each pair of subjects); immediately followed by Phase 2 (during which, two computer systems were provided to each pair). Data were collected in 1-h sessions using instantaneous scan sampling. There was no habituation to the computer system, nor were there any significant increases in aggression, rough scratching, and abnormal behaviours in either computer phase, which indicates that computer-joystick systems are effective as enrichment for captive orangutans. However, a high level of interest in the computer was shown by only a few individuals, which highlights a need to take into consideration individual differences when providing computerised enrichment to captive non-human primates. It would also be advisable to provide other forms of enrichment to increase activity levels for individuals which are not interested in interacting with a computer, as well as to help increase the diversity of behaviours being stimulated by the enrichment.

A review of zoo‐based cognitive research using touchscreen interfaces

“…This approach can have safety risks and may be prone to unintended researcher‐bias effects. Alternatively, such reinforcement can be distributed via an automatic feeder integrated with the software system (e.g., Mallavarapu, Bloomsmith, Kuhar, & Maple, ). Such systems are more experimentally reliable, but proper upkeep of the systems is required to prevent feeder malfunctions that may disrupt the reinforcement schedule.…”

“…More recently, touchscreen systems have been shown to provide enriching effects for a range of primate and carnivore species in zoo settings (Boostrom, ; Mallavarapu et al, ; Perdue, ; Tarou et al, ). For instance, during the introduction of a cognitive research program at Scotland's Edinburgh Zoo, researchers observed that although chimpanzees did not understand the cognitive task presented to them, their repeated use of the touchscreen showed that they found it reinforcing (Herrelko, Vick, & Buchanan‐Smith, ).…”

Monitoring the social behavior of a bachelor mandrill (Mandrillus sphinx) dyad participating in touchscreen‐mediated cognitive testing

“…However, at the same zoo, increased aggression was observed in the presence of a computer‐joystick CT system provided to orangutan dyads off exhibit (Tarou, Kuhar, Adcock, Bloomsmith, & Maple, ). A follow‐up study to Tarou et al () reported no increase in agonistic behavior when a CT device was present; however, the presence of a second testing apparatus decreased affiliative behavior between orangutans compared to when only one testing apparatus was available (Mallavarapu, Bloomsmith, Kuhar, & Maple, ).…”

Comparative performance of orangutans (Pongo spp.), gorillas (Gorilla gorilla gorilla), and drills (Mandrillus leucophaeus), in an ephemeral foraging task

“…Three of them (Satu, Madu, and Chantek) had been tested in Salwiczek et al (2012)'s original plate study and had failed. All subjects were also tested in an unrelated computerized‐touchscreen task during the period of our study, and some had participated in other computerized tasks (Diamond et al, 2016; Mallavarapu et al, 2013; Paxton Gazes et al, 2017) and manual cognitive tests (Anderson et al, 2007; Brosnan, Flemming, et al, 2011; Flemming et al, 2012; Mallavarapu, 2009; Talbot et al, 2015) prior this one. One female, Madu, was reared in a computer‐enriched environment at the Georgia State University Language Research Center, where she participated in various cognitive tests (Beran, 2002; Washburn et al, 2007).…”