Baboons (Papio papio) spontaneously process the first‐order but not second‐order configural properties of faces

A two‐alternative forced‐choice discrimination task was used to assess whether baboons (N=7) spontaneously process qualitative (i.e., first‐order) or quantitative (i.e., second‐order) variations in the configural arrangement of facial features. Experiment 1 used as test stimuli second‐order pictorial faces of humans or baboons in which the mouth and the eyes were rotated upside down relative to the normal face. Baboons readily discriminated two different normal faces but did not discriminate a normal face from its second‐order modified version. Experiment 2 used human or baboon faces for which the first‐order configural properties had been distorted by reversing the location of the eyes and mouth within the face. Discrimination was prompt with these stimuli. Experiment 3 replicated some of the conditions and the results of experiment 1, thus ruling out possible effects of learning. It is concluded that baboons are more adept at spontaneously processing first‐ than second‐order configural facial properties, similar to what is known in the human developmental literature. Am. J. Primatol. 70:415–422, 2008. © 2007 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

[1]  W. Dittrich.  Representation of Faces in Longtailed Macaques (Macaca fascicularis) , 2010 .

[2]  L. Parr,et al.  Three studies on configural face processing by chimpanzees , 2006, Brain and Cognition.

[3]  J. Fagot,et al.  Categorizing facial identities, emotions, and genders: attention to high- and low-spatial frequencies by children and adults. , 2005, Journal of experimental child psychology.

[4]  D. Maurer,et al.  Developmental changes in face processing skills. , 2003, Journal of experimental child psychology.

[5]  D. Maurer,et al.  The many faces of configural processing , 2002, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[6]  M. Tomonaga,et al.  Development of face recognition in an infant gibbon (Hylobates agilis) , 2001 .

[7]  J. Fagot,et al.  Perception of Partly Occluded Figures by Baboons (Papio Papio) , 2000, Perception.

[8]  J. Vauclair,et al.  Comparative Assessment of Distance Processing and Hemispheric Specialization in Humans and Baboons (Papio papio) , 1998, Brain and Cognition.

[9]  L. Parr,et al.  Why Faces May Be Special: Evidence of the Inversion Effect in Chimpanzees , 1998, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[10]  Michael B. Lewis,et al.  The Thatcher Illusion as a Test of Configural Disruption , 1997, Perception.

[11]  C. Umilta,et al.  Face preference at birth. , 1996, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[12]  M. Tomonaga.  How laboratory-raised Japanese monkeys (Macaca fuscata) perceive rotated photographs of monkeys: Evidence for an inversion effect in face perception , 1994, Primates.

[13]  G. Rhodes,et al.  What's lost in inverted faces? , 1993, Cognition.

[14]  V. Bruce,et al.  Remembering facial configurations , 1991, Cognition.

[15]  S. Carey,et al.  Why faces are and are not special: an effect of expertise. , 1986, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[16]  C. Bruce,et al.  Face recognition by monkeys: Absence of an inversion effect , 1982, Neuropsychologia.

[17]  P. Thompson,et al.  Margaret Thatcher: A New Illusion , 1980, Perception.

[18]  G. V. Hoesen,et al.  Face recognition in the rhesus monkey , 1979, Neuropsychologia.

[19]  S. Carey,et al.  From piecemeal to configurational representation of faces. , 1977, Science.

[20]  C. C. Goren,et al.  Visual following and pattern discrimination of face-like stimuli by newborn infants. , 1975, Pediatrics.

[21]  T. Matsuzawa,et al.  Superiority of conspecific faces and reduced inversion effect in face perception by a chimpanzee. , 1993, Folia primatologica; international journal of primatology.

[22]  Jeanne Altmann,et al.  Baboon mothers and infants , 1980 .