Cited by 579Primate Behavior and EcologyChild and Animal Learning DevelopmentPleistocene-Era Hominins and Archaeology

Apes Save Tools for Future Use

Mulcahy, Nicholas J., Call, Josep·2006·Science

Abstract

Planning for future needs, not just current ones, is one of the most formidable human cognitive achievements. Whether this skill is a uniquely human adaptation is a controversial issue. In a study we conducted, bonobos and orangutans selected, transported, and saved appropriate tools above baseline levels to use them 1 hour later (experiment 1). Experiment 2 extended these results to a 14-hour delay between collecting and using the tools. Experiment 3 showed that seeing the apparatus during tool selection was not necessary to succeed. These findings suggest that the precursor skills for planning for the future evolved in great apes before 14 million years ago, when all extant great ape species shared a common ancestor.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1126/science.1125456

Cites

17 of 17 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?

  • In similar experiments, apes appear to plan for future possibilities by choosing and retaining appropriate tools for future use.

    “In similar experiments, apes also appear to plan for future possibilities by choosing and retaining appropriate tools for future use [167,168].”

    From Is episodic-like memory <i>like</i> episodic memory? (2024) · cites this paper as [167]

  • Recent experimental studies have shown evidence for planning in chimpanzees, bonobos and orangutans.

    “recent experimental studies have shown evidence for planning in chimpanzees, bonobos and orangutans”

    From Keeping track of time: evidence for episodic-like memory in great apes (2010) · cites this paper as Mulcahy and Call 2006

  • Episodic memory and future planning depend on common processes.

    “It has also been argued that episodic memory and future planning depend on common processes”

    From Keeping track of time: evidence for episodic-like memory in great apes (2010) · cites this paper as Mulcahy and Call 2006

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mulcahy, N. J., & Call, J.
Affiliations
Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology (DE)
Corresponding author
Call, Josep
Venue
Science
Published
2006-05-19
Volume
312
Issue
5776
Pages
1038-1040
ISSN
  • 0036-8075 (ISSN-L)
  • 1095-9203
OpenAlex
W2033421187
Cited by
578
References
16
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 27 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 37 · 2019: 70 · 2018: 29 · 2017: 25 · 2016: 29 · 2015: 23 · 2014: 26 · 2013: 25 · 2012: 35
FWCI
38.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Max Planck Institute for Plasma Physics (submittedVersion)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Primate Behavior and Ecology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Child and Animal Learning Development
  • Social Sciences › Anthropology › Pleistocene-Era Hominins and Archaeology
Keywords
tool use, future planning, tool selection, bonobos, orangutans, great apes, cognitive evolution, human evolution, delay of gratification, common ancestor
MeSH terms
Animals, Association Learning, Pan troglodytes, Cognition, Biological Evolution, Mental Processes, Pongo pygmaeus, Pan paniscus

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