CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 67Primate Behavior and EcologyChild and Animal Learning DevelopmentAnimal Behavior and Welfare Studies

Chimpanzees fail to plan in an exchange task but succeed in a tool-using procedure

Dufour, V., Sterck, E.H.M.·2008·Behavioural Processes
DOI 10.1016/j.beproc.2008.04.003
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Planning has long been considered a uniquely human capacity. Lately, however, it has been shown that apes and a corvid species act now to derive a material future benefit. Since primates are highly social animals and their sociality is considered a strong selective force that resulted in complex cognitive capacities, planning is also expected in social situations. Unfortunately, prompting from social partners cannot be excluded in a social setting. Therefore, we controlled for this factor by testing the capacity to plan in chimpanzees using an exchange paradigm, that involves both a material and a social component, and a tool-use paradigm, similar to the one used on two other ape species. All chimpanzees failed to plan in the exchange task, but three individuals showed planning behavior in the tool-use task. Our methods controlled for the fact that chimpanzees were not prompted by the visibility of the reward at the moment of planning and also could not repeat a previously acquired routine. The best interpretation for our results is that chimpanzees can plan. However, planning was limited to the situation where the action to attain the future benefit only depended on a chimpanzee's own behavior.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.beproc.2008.04.003

Cites

43 of 43 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Dufour, V., & Sterck, E. H. M.
Affiliations
  • Utrecht University (NL)
  • University of St Andrews (GB)
Corresponding author
Dufour, V.
ORCID
Sterck, E.H.M.
Venue
Behavioural Processes
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2008-09
Volume
79
Issue
1
Pages
19-27
ISSN
0376-6357 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.beproc.2008.04.003
OpenAlex
W2034990387
Cited by
67
References
42
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 7
FWCI
8.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Behavioural Processes (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Primate Behavior and Ecology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Child and Animal Learning Development
  • Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal Behavior and Welfare Studies
Keywords
chimpanzees, planning, tool use, social cognition, primate cognition, social learning, future benefits, animal cognition
MeSH terms
Animals, Pan troglodytes, Choice Behavior, Female, Imitative Behavior, Learning, Male, Problem Solving, Reward, Social Behavior, Tool Use Behavior

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review