Distinctiveness enhances long-term event memory in non-human primates, irrespective of reinforcement

Reciprocity: Different behavioural strategies, cognitive mechanisms and psychological processes

Reciprocity is probably one of the most debated theories in evolutionary research. After more than 40 years of research, some scientists conclude that reciprocity is an almost uniquely human trait mainly because it is cognitively demanding. Others, however, conclude that reciprocity is widespread and of great importance to many species. Yet, it is unclear how these species reciprocate, given its apparent cognitive complexity. Therefore, our aim was to unravel the psychological processes underlying reciprocity. By bringing together findings from studies investigating different aspects of reciprocity, we show that reciprocity is a rich concept with different behavioural strategies and cognitive mechanisms that require very different psychological processes. We reviewed evidence from three textbook examples, i.e. the Norway rat, common vampire bat and brown capuchin monkey, and show that the species use different strategies and mechanisms to reciprocate. We continue by examining the psychological processes of reciprocity. We show that the cognitive load varies between different forms of reciprocity. Several factors can lower the memory demands of reciprocity such as distinctiveness of encounters, memory of details and network size. Furthermore, there are different information operation systems in place, which also vary in their cognitive load due to assessing the number of encounters and the quality and quantity of help. We conclude that many species possess the psychological processes to show some form of reciprocity. Hence, reciprocity might be a widespread phenomenon that varies in terms of strategies and mechanisms.

Long-Term Memory of Past Events in Great Apes

It has been claimed that the ability to recall personal past events is uniquely human. We review recent evidence that great apes can remember specific events for long periods of time, spanning months and even years, and that such memories can be enhanced by distinctiveness (irrespective of reinforcement) and follow a forgetting curve similar to that in humans. Moreover, recall is enhanced when apes are presented with features that are diagnostic of the event, consistent with notions of encoding specificity and cue overload in human memory. These findings are also consistent with the involuntary retrieval of past events in humans, a mode of remembering that is thought to be less cognitively demanding than voluntary retrieval. Taken together, these findings reveal further similarities between the way humans and animals remember past events and open new avenues of research on long-term memory in nonhuman animals.

Time-space-displaced responses in the orangutan vocal system

One of the defining features of language is displaced reference-the capacity to transmit information about something that is not present or about a past or future event. It is very rare in nature and has not been shown in any nonhuman primate, confounding, as such, any understanding of its precursors and evolution in the human lineage. Here, we describe a vocal phenomenon in a wild great ape with unparalleled affinities with displaced reference. When exposed to predator models, Sumatran orangutan mothers temporarily suppressed alarm calls up to 20 min until the model was out of sight. Subjects delayed their vocal responses in function of perceived danger for themselves, but four major predictions for stress-based mechanisms were not met. Conversely, vocal delay was also a function of perceived danger for another-an infant-suggesting high-order cognition. Our findings suggest that displaced reference in language is likely to have originally piggybacked on akin behaviors in an ancestral hominid.

Non-goal-directed recall of specific events in apes after long delays

We examined if apes spontaneously remember one-time, distinctive events across long delays when probed by discriminant cues. Apes witnessed an experimenter hide a cache of food, which they could then retrieve. They retrieved one of two food types; one more distinctive than the other. Two, 10 or 50 weeks later, the apes returned to the same enclosure and found a piece of the previously hidden food on the ground. An experimenter who had not hidden the food was also present. Apes immediately searched the location where the food was previously hidden (no food was here), showing recall of the event. One week later, apes returned to the same enclosure, with the same food on the ground, but now the experimenter that had hidden the food was present. Again, apes immediately searched the hiding location. Apes that had not witnessed the hiding event did not search. There was no significant effect of food type, and retention declined from exposure to the two-week delay, then levelled, consistent with the forgetting curve in humans (Ebbinghaus, H. 1964 Memory: a contribution to experimental psychology (transl. H.A. Ruger & C.E. Bussenvis). New York, NY: Dover. (Original work published 1885.)). This is the first study to show apes can recall a one-time, non-goal-directed event longer than two weeks ago and that apes' recall declines in accordance with a standard retention function.