Assessing consistency in children’s and monkeys’ performance across computerized and manual detour problem tasks

The detour test is a widely used test in comparative psychology that assesses various cognitive abilities, including inhibitory control. The goal of this study was to assess the degree of consistency in the performance of human children and capuchin monkeys on a manual detour test and on a computerized equivalent. Because computerized testing is more common in comparative research, it is important to determine whether a computerized version of the detour problem can provide measures of general inhibitory that align with measures obtained from the same subjects when given a manual version. We found that human children and capuchin monkeys approached both tasks very differently and also that there was no correlation between the manual and the computerized task within each species. This suggests caution is needed when considering one format or the other when the goal is to use a single task to provide a general measure of inhibitory control.

[1]  J. Call,et al.  Younger apes and human children plan their moves in a maze task , 2014, Cognition.

[2]  Ádám Miklósi,et al.  Social learning in dogs: the effect of a human demonstrator on the performance of dogs in a detour task , 2001, Animal Behaviour.

[3]  L. Regolin,et al.  Comparative Vertebrate Lateralization: Facing an obstacle: Lateralization of object and spatial cognition , 2002 .

[4]  Tetsuro Matsuzawa,et al.  Acquisition of navigation by chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) in an automated fingermaze task , 2001, Animal Cognition.

[5]  S. Brosnan,et al.  Capuchin Monkeys (Cebus [Sapajus] apella) Show Planning in a Manual Maze Task , 2019, Journal of comparative psychology.

[6]  Can Kabadayi,et al.  Are parrots poor at motor self-regulation or is the cylinder task poor at measuring it? , 2017, Animal Cognition.

[7]  A comparison of computerized and standard versions of the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test. , 1999, The Clinical neuropsychologist.

[8]  Daniela Corbetta,et al.  Object retrieval in the 1st year of life: learning effects of task exposure and box transparency. , 2004, Developmental psychology.

[9]  L. Huber,et al.  Measures of Dogs' Inhibitory Control Abilities Do Not Correlate across Tasks , 2017, Front. Psychol..

[10]  Allison M. Barnard,et al.  The evolution of self-control , 2014, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[11]  M. Wells.  DETOUR EXPERIMENTS WITH OCTOPUSES , 1964 .

[12]  Dorothy M. Fragaszy,et al.  Navigating two-dimensional mazes: chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and capuchins (Cebus apella sp.) profit from experience differently , 2009, Animal Cognition.

[13]  A. Diamond,et al.  Development as progressive inhibitory control of action: retrieval of a contiguous object☆ , 1989 .

[14]  L. Regolin,et al.  Object and spatial representations in detour problems by chicks , 1995, Animal Behaviour.

[15]  Studies On Detour Behaviour , 1959 .

[16]  I. Penner,et al.  The Stroop Task: Comparison Between the Original Paradigm and Computerized Versions in Children and Adults , 2012, The Clinical neuropsychologist.

[17]  C. L. Hull.  The goal-gradient hypothesis applied to some "field-force' problems in the behavior of young children. , 1938 .

[18]  Jackie Chappell,et al.  A novel test of planning ability: Great apes can plan step-by-step but not in advance of action , 2013, Behavioural Processes.

[19]  Emily D. Klein,et al.  An efficient computerized testing method for the capuchin monkey (Cebus apella): Adaptation of the LRC-CTS to a socially housed nonhuman primate species , 2008, Behavior research methods.

[20]  R. Heaton,et al.  Standard versus computerized administration of the wisconsin card sorting test , 1996 .

[21]  E. Sterck,et al.  Defying Food – How Distance Determines Monkeys’ Ability to Inhibit Reaching for Food , 2016, Front. Psychol..

[22]  M. Wells.  Detour Experiments with Split-Brain Octopuses , 1970 .

[23]  Denis Cousineau,et al.  Confidence intervals in within-subject designs: A simpler solution to Loftus and Masson's method , 2005 .

[24]  K. Lewin,et al.  Vectors, Cognitive Processes, and Mr. Tolman's Criticism , 1933 .

[25]  D. Fragaszy,et al.  Strategic navigation of two-dimensional alley mazes: comparing capuchin monkeys and chimpanzees , 2003, Animal Cognition.

[26]  L. T. Hobhouse,et al.  Mind in Evolution , 1989 .

[27]  Giorgio Vallortigara,et al.  Detour behaviour in three species of birds: quails (Coturnix sp.), herring gulls (Larus cachinnans) and canaries (Serinus canaria) , 2005, Animal Cognition.

[28]  J. Lockman,et al.  Going around transparent and grid-like barriers: detour ability as a perception–action skill , 2001 .

[29]  P. Livesey,et al.  Cue significance and response regulation in 3- to 6-year-old children's learning of multiple choice discrimination tasks. , 1985, Developmental psychobiology.

[30]  R. B. Tallarico,et al.  On the correlation of brain size and problem-solving behavior of ring doves and pigeons. , 1975, Brain, behavior and evolution.

[31]  Fiona R Cross,et al.  The execution of planned detours by spider-eating predators. , 2016, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[32]  Thomas Collett,et al.  A toad's devious approach to its prey: A study of some complex uses of depth vision , 1979, Journal of comparative physiology.

[33]  A. Diamond,et al.  The relationship between cognition and action: performance of children 3 1 2 –7 years old on a stroop- like day-night test , 1994, Cognition.

[34]  M. Beran,et al.  Sequential responding and planning in capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) , 2012, Animal Cognition.

[35]  Emil W. Menzel,et al.  Do Primates Plan Routes? Simple Detour Problems Reconsidered. , 2007 .

[36]  Inhibition in Clark’s nutcrackers (Nucifraga columbiana): results of a detour-reaching test , 2016, Animal Cognition.

[37]  W. Köhler.  The Mentality of Apes. , 2018, Nature.

[38]  E. Thorndike.  Animal Intelligence; Experimental Studies , 2009 .

[39]  Laurie R Santos,et al.  Cognitive Preconditions for Responses to Fairness: An Object Retrieval Test of Inhibitory Control in Capuchin Monkeys (Cebus apella) , 2009 .

[40]  Josep Call,et al.  Reaching around barriers: the performance of the great apes and 3–5-year-old children , 2009, Animal Cognition.

[41]  Development of maze navigation by tufted capuchins (Cebus apella) , 2011, Behavioural Processes.

[42]  S. Itakura,et al.  Planning in human children (Homo sapiens) assessed by maze problems on the touch screen. , 2009, Journal of comparative psychology.

[43]  E. Tolman.  Lewin's Concept of Vectors , 1932 .

[44]  Jackie Chappell,et al.  Development of planning in 4- to 10-year-old children: reducing inhibitory demands does not improve performance. , 2014, Journal of experimental child psychology.

[45]  D. Washburn,et al.  Exploration of virtual mazes by rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta) , 2003, Animal Cognition.

[46]  Can Kabadayi,et al.  The detour paradigm in animal cognition , 2017, Animal Cognition.

[47]  Bonnie M. Perdue,et al.  Looking ahead? Computerized maze task performance by chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes), rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta), capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella), and human children (Homo sapiens). , 2015, Journal of comparative psychology.

[48]  G. Juszczak,et al.  Detour Behavior of Mice Trained with Transparent, Semitransparent and Opaque Barriers , 2016, PloS one.

[49]  Can Kabadayi,et al.  Ravens, New Caledonian crows and jackdaws parallel great apes in motor self-regulation despite smaller brains , 2016, Royal Society Open Science.