The influence of kin relationship and reciprocal context on chimpanzees' other-regarding preferences

Prosocial or photo preferences? Gorillas' prosocial choices using a touchscreen

Three male Western lowland gorillas (Gorilla gorilla gorilla) were given the opportunity to select their own or conspecific photos on a touchscreen to indicate whether they wished the experimenter to deliver a food reward only to them or to them and the selected conspecific(s). This is only the second symbolic test of prosocial preferences with apes using a touchscreen, and the first with gorillas. The use of self and other photographs as symbols of prosocial choices was intuitive while controlling for the distraction of visible food rewards, and allowing for tests of transfer to further validate apparent prosocial intentions. Gorillas rapidly learned to avoid selecting a photograph of an empty enclosure that resulted in no rewards for any of the gorillas and transferred this learning to a novel photograph. The gorillas did not behave in a consistently self-interested or prosocial manner but they clearly rejected the opportunity to choose spitefully. Their preferences for certain photographs did not necessarily reflect a preference to be prosocial toward that particular individual because these preferences did not transfer to novel photographs of the same individuals. The results call into question whether gorillas recognize themselves and conspecifics in photographs but cannot conclusively speak to whether gorillas have prosocial preferences. They do stress the importance of carefully probing alternative explanations when inferring intentions from observable behaviors.

The proximate regulation of prosocial behaviour: towards a conceptual framework for comparative research

Humans and many other animal species act in ways that benefit others. Such prosocial behaviour has been studied extensively across a range of disciplines over the last decades, but findings to date have led to conflicting conclusions about prosociality across and even within species. Here, we present a conceptual framework to study the proximate regulation of prosocial behaviour in humans, non-human primates and potentially other animals. We build on psychological definitions of prosociality and spell out three key features that need to be in place for behaviour to count as prosocial: benefitting others, intentionality, and voluntariness. We then apply this framework to review observational and experimental studies on sharing behaviour and targeted helping in human children and non-human primates. We show that behaviours that are usually subsumed under the same terminology (e.g. helping) can differ substantially across and within species and that some of them do not fulfil our criteria for prosociality. Our framework allows for precise mapping of prosocial behaviours when retrospectively evaluating studies and offers guidelines for future comparative work.

Empirical challenges from the comparative and developmental literature to the Shared Intentionality Theory - a review of alternative data on recursive mind reading, prosociality, imitation and cumulative culture

Humans have an irresistible inclination to coordinate actions with others, leading to species-unique forms of cooperation. According to the highly influential Shared Intentionality Theory (SITh), human cooperation is made possible by shared intentionality (SI), typically defined as a suite of socio-cognitive and motivational traits for sharing psychological states with others, thereby enabling individuals to engage in joint action in the mutually aware pursuit of shared goals. SITh theorises that SI evolved as late as 400,000 years ago, when our ancestors (in particular, Homo heidelbergensis) turned to a kind of food procurement that obligatorily required joint coordinated action. SI is, thus, hypothesized to be absent in other extant species, including our closest genetic relatives, the nonhuman great apes ("apes"). According to SITh, ape psychology is exclusively driven by individualistic motivations, as opposed to human psychology which is uniquely driven by altruistic motivations. The evolutionary scenario proposed by SITh builds on a series of findings from socio-cognitive research with apes and human children, and on the assumption that abilities expressed early in human development are human universals, unlikely to have been shaped by socio-cultural influences. Drawing on the primatological and developmental literature, we provide a systematic - albeit selective - review of SITh-inconsistent findings concerning psychological and behavioural traits theorised to be constitutive of SI. The findings we review pertain to all three thematic clusters typically addressed in SITh: (i) recursive mind reading; (ii) prosociality; (iii) imitation and cumulative culture. We conclude that such alternative data undermine two core SITh claims: the late evolutionary emergence of SI and the radical divide between ape and human psychology. We also discuss several conceptual and methodological limitations that currently hamper reliable comparative research on SI, in particular those engendered by Western-centric biases in the social sciences, where an overreliance on Western samples has promoted the formulation of Western-centric conceptualisations, operationalisations and methodologies.

Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) in U.S. Zoos, Sanctuaries, and Research Facilities: A Survey-Based Comparison of Species-Typical Behaviors

A survey was sent to zoos, research facilities, and sanctuaries which housed chimpanzees. Data collected included information about 1122 chimpanzees’ age, sex, social group-size, rearing history, and enclosure. Respondents were also asked to indicate if certain behaviors had been observed in each chimpanzee over the prior two years. Species- typical behaviors (STBs) were queried, including copulation, tool-use, nest-building, and social grooming. Tool-use was reported present for 94.3% of the sample (n = 982), active social grooming for 85.7% (n = 1121), copulation for 68.3% (n = 863) and nest-building for 58.9% (n = 982). Of the subjects for whom we had data regarding all four STBs (n = 860), 45.6% were reported to engage in all four. Logistic regression analyses using forward Wald criteria were conducted to determine the best model for each STB based on the predictors of age, sex, rearing history, group-size, facility-type, and a sex-by-rearing interaction. The best model for copulation (χ2(6) = 124.62, p < 0.001) included rearing, group-size, facility-type, and the sex-by-rearing interaction. Chimpanzees were more likely to copulate if they were mother-reared, in larger groups, living in research facilities, and, if not mother-reared (NOTMR), more likely to copulate if they were female. The best model for tool-use retained the predictors of age category, facility-type, and sex-by-rearing (χ2(5) = 55.78, p < 0.001). Chimpanzees were more likely to use tools if they were adult, living in research facilities, and if NOTMR, were female. The best model for nest-building included facility-type and rearing (χ2(3) = 205.71, p < 0.001). Chimpanzees were more likely to build nests if they were MR and if they were living in zoos or in sanctuaries. The best model for active social grooming retained the predictors of age, sex, rearing, and type of facility (χ2(6) = 102.15, p < 0.001). Chimpanzees were more likely to engage in active social grooming if they were immature, female, mother-reared, and living in zoos. This research provides a basic behavioral profile for many chimpanzees living under human care in the United States and allows us to determine potential methods for improving the welfare of these and future chimpanzees in this population.

Choices behind the veil of ignorance in Formosan macaques

An ongoing debate regarding the evolution of morality is whether other species show precursory moral behavior. The veil of ignorance (VOI) paradigm is often used to elicit human moral judgment but has never been tested in other primates. We study the division of resources behind the VOI in Formosan macaques. Monkeys choose the equal division more often when a conspecific is present than when it is absent, suggesting a degree of impartiality. To better understand this impartiality, we measure a monkey's reactions to two directions of inequity: one regarding inequity to its advantage and the other to its disadvantage. We find that disadvantageous inequity aversion correlates with the degree of impartiality behind the VOI. Therefore, seemingly impartial behavior could result from a primitive negative reaction to being disadvantaged. This suggests a mechanism to explain a tendency toward impartiality.

Prosocial and antisocial choices in a monogamous cichlid with biparental care

Human society is cooperative and characterized by spontaneous prosociality. Comparative studies on endotherm vertebrates suggest that social interdependence causes the evolution of proactive prosociality. To test the generality of this hypothesis, we modify a prosocial choice task for application to the convict cichlid, Amatitlania nigrofasciata, a monogamous fish with biparental care and a strong pair bond. We also affirm that male subjects learn to favor prosocial choices when their mates are the recipients in a neighboring tank. When the neighboring tank is empty, males choose randomly. Furthermore, in the absence of their mates, males behave prosocially toward a stranger female. However, if the mate of the subjects is also visible in the third tank, or if a male is a potential recipient, then subjects make antisocial choices. To conclude, fish may show both spontaneous prosocial and antisocial behaviors according to their social relationships with conspecifics and the overall social context.

Targeted helping and cooperation in zoo-living chimpanzees and bonobos

Directly comparing the prosocial behaviour of our two closest living relatives, bonobos and chimpanzees, is essential to deepening our understanding of the evolution of human prosociality. We examined whether helpers of six dyads of chimpanzees and bonobos transferred tools to a conspecific. In the experiment 'Helping', transferring a tool did not benefit the helper, while in the experiment 'Cooperation', the helper only obtained a reward by transferring the correct tool. Chimpanzees did not share tools with conspecifics in either experiment, except for a mother-daughter pair, where the mother shared a tool twice in the experiment 'Helping'. By contrast, all female-female bonobo dyads sometimes transferred a tool even without benefit. When helpers received an incentive, we found consistent transfers in all female-female bonobo dyads but none in male-female dyads. Even though reaching by the bonobo receivers increased the likelihood that a transfer occurred, we found no significant species difference in whether receivers reached to obtain tools. Thus, receivers' behaviour did not explain the lack of transfers from chimpanzee helpers. This study supports the notion that bonobos might have a greater ability to understand social problems and the collaborative nature of such tasks.

Chimpanzees behave prosocially in a group-specific manner

Chimpanzees act cooperatively in the wild, but whether they afford benefits to others, and whether their tendency to act prosocially varies across communities, is unclear. Here, we show that chimpanzees from neighboring communities provide valuable resources to group members at personal cost, and that the magnitude of their prosocial behavior is group specific. Provided with a resource-donation experiment allowing free (partner) choice, we observed an increase in prosocial acts across the study period in most of the chimpanzees. When group members could profit (test condition), chimpanzees provided resources more frequently and for longer durations than when their acts produced inaccessible resources (control condition). Strikingly, chimpanzees' prosocial behavior was group specific, with more socially tolerant groups acting more prosocially. We conclude that chimpanzees may purposely behave prosocially toward group members, and that the notion of group-specific sociality in nonhuman animals should crucially inform discussions on the evolution of prosocial behavior.

Not by the same token: A female orangutan (Pongo pygmaeus) is selectively prosocial

Studies of prosocial behavior in nonhumans have focused on group-living social animals. Despite being highly social and closely related to humans, chimpanzees have rarely exhibited prosocial preferences in experimental tasks. Fewer studies have provided their non group-living relatives-orangutans-with the opportunity to express prosocial preferences. Here, we allowed a single female orangutan to provide rewards for herself and for her mother, sister, or both, across various phases, using a token economy task. The orangutan was more likely to choose prosocially when she could provide rewards to her sister and herself compared to when she could provide rewards to her mother and herself. However, when presented with the simultaneous options of providing rewards for self, self and mother, or self and sister, she chose prosocially equally often to her mother and sister. She made the largest number of prosocial choices in a phase when she could provide rewards to all participants (herself, her sister, and her mother) rather than providing rewards only to herself or only to herself and one other participant. Despite the obvious limitations of a single case study, the study adds to the limited information on prosocial preferences in less social primate species, particularly when given the chance to share food items with different kin.

Bottlenose dolphins do not behave prosocially in an instrumental helping task

Although bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) are known for being a highly social species that live in complex societies that rely on coalition formation and cooperative behaviours, experimental studies on prosocial behaviour in this species are scarce. Helping others reach their goals (instrumental helping) is considered as an example of prosocial behaviour. Thus, in this pilot study, we examined whether a group of five captive bottlenose dolphins would behave prosocially in an instrumental helping task. Dolphins were given the opportunity to share tokens that allow their partners to obtain a preferred toy. Dolphins were tested in their free time and they could choose to share the tokens or do nothing. None of the dolphins shared the tokens, instead, they preferred to play with them, ignoring their partners. They did transfer the tokens to other sides of the pool but out of the reach of their partners. Therefore, this group of dolphins did not spontaneously help their partners in this task, showing no preference for other-regarding behaviour in this context.

Young children display an increase in prosocial donating in response to an upwards shift in generosity by a same-aged peer

Adult humans frequently engage in the reciprocal exchange of resources with other individuals. However, despite the important role that reciprocity plays in maintaining co-operative exchange we know relatively little of when, and how, reciprocity develops. We first asked whether pairs of young children (M = 74 months) would engage in direct reciprocity in a ‘prosocial choice test’ where a donor could select either a higher, or a lower, value reward (1v 2) for a partner at no cost to themselves (1v 1). In a subsequent retest we asked, for the first time, whether young children increase their level of prosocial donating in response to an upwards shift in generosity from an initially selfish partner. In order to determine whether interacting with another child was fundamental to the development of reciprocity we included a novel yoked non-agent condition. The results suggest that the children were engaging in a calculated form of reciprocity where the prior behavior of their child partner influenced their subsequent level of donation days after the initial exchange. Crucially we show that the children were not influenced by the value of the rewards received per se, rather selection by a human agent was key to reciprocity.

Task Differences and Prosociality; Investigating Pet Dogs' Prosocial Preferences in a Token Choice Paradigm

Prosociality has received increasing interest by non-human animal researchers since the initial discoveries that suggested it is not a uniquely human trait. However, thus far studies, even within the same species, have not garnered conclusive results. A prominent suggestion for this disparity is the effect methodology can have on prosocial responses in animals. We recently found evidence of prosociality in domestic dogs towards familiar conspecifics using a bar-pulling paradigm, in which a subject could pull a rope to deliver food to its partner. Therefore, the current study aimed to assess whether dogs would show a similar response in a different paradigm, based on the token exchange task paradigm frequently used with primates. In this task, dogs had the option to touch a token with their nose that delivered a reward to an adjacent receiver enclosure, which contained a familiar conspecific, a stranger or no dog at all. Crucially, we also included a social facilitation control condition, whereby the partner (stranger/familiar) was present but unable to access the food. We found that the familiarity effect remained consistent across tasks, with dogs of both the bar-pulling and token choice experiments providing more food to familiar partners than in a non-social control and providing less food to stranger partners than this same control. However, in contrast to our previous bar-pulling experiment, we could not exclude social facilitation as an underlying motive in the current task. We propose this difference in results between tasks may be related to increased task complexity in the token choice paradigm, making it harder for dogs to discriminate between the test and social facilitation conditions. Overall our findings suggest that subtle methodological changes can have an impact on prosocial behaviours in dogs and highlights the importance of controlling for social facilitation effects in such experiments.

The nature of prosociality in chimpanzees

An important debate centres around the nature of prosociality in nonhuman primates. Chimpanzees help other individuals in some experimental settings, yet they do not readily share food. One solution to this paradox is that they are motivated to help others provided there are no competing interests. However, benefits to recipients could arise as by-products of testing. Here we report two studies that separate by-product from intended helping in chimpanzees using a GO/NO-GO paradigm. Actors in one group could help a recipient by releasing a food box, but the same action for another group prevented a recipient from being able to get food. We find no evidence for helping-chimpanzees engaged in the test regardless of the effects on their partners. Illusory prosocial behaviour could arise as a by-product of task design.

Social manipulation in nonhuman primates: Cognitive and motivational determinants

Social interactions are the result of individuals' cooperative and competitive tendencies expressed over an extended period of time. Although social manipulation, i.e., using another individual to achieve one's own goals, is a crucial aspect of social interactions, there has been no comprehensive attempt to differentiate its various types and to map its cognitive and motivational determinants. For this purpose, we survey in this article the experimental literature on social interactions in nonhuman primates. We take social manipulation, illustrated by a case study with orangutans (Pongo abelii), as our starting point and move in two directions. First, we will focus on a flexibility/sociality axis that includes technical problem solving, social tool-use and communication. Second, we will focus on a motivational/prosociality axis that includes exploitation, cooperation, and helping. Combined, the two axes offer a way to capture a broad range of social interactions performed by human and nonhuman primates.

Critical issues in experimental studies of prosociality in non-human species

Prosociality and acts of altruism are defined as behaviours which benefit another with either no gain or some immediate cost to the self. To understand the evolutionary origins of these behaviours, in recent years, studies have extended to primate species; however, studies on non-primates are still scarce. In light of the fact that phylogenetic closeness to humans does not appear to correlate with prosocial tendencies, but rather differences in the propensity towards prosociality may be linked to allomaternal care or collaborative foraging, it appears that convergent selection pressures may be at work in the evolution of prosociality. It would hence seem particularly important to extend such studies to species outside the primate clade, to allow for comparative hypothesis testing of the factors affecting the evolution of prosocial behaviours. In the current review, we focus on the experimental paradigms which have been used so far (i.e. the prosocial choice task, helping paradigms and food-sharing tests) and highlight the strengths and weaknesses of each method. In line with the aim of encouraging a broader comparative approach to the topic of prosociality, particular emphasis is placed on the methodological issues that need to be taken into account. We conclude that although a number of the paradigms used so far may be successfully applied to non-primate species, there is a need to simplify the cognitive demands of the tasks and ensure task comprehension to allow for a 'fair' comparative approach of prosocial tendencies across species.

Why mutual helping in most natural systems is neither conflict-free nor based on maximal conflict

Mutual helping for direct benefits can be explained by various game theoretical models, which differ mainly in terms of the underlying conflict of interest between two partners. Conflict is minimal if helping is self-serving and the partner benefits as a by-product. In contrast, conflict is maximal if partners are in a prisoner's dilemma with both having the pay-off-dominant option of not returning the other's investment. Here, we provide evolutionary and ecological arguments for why these two extremes are often unstable under natural conditions and propose that interactions with intermediate levels of conflict are frequent evolutionary endpoints. We argue that by-product helping is prone to becoming an asymmetric investment game since even small variation in by-product benefits will lead to the evolution of partner choice, leading to investments by the chosen class. Second, iterated prisoner's dilemmas tend to take place in stable social groups where the fitness of partners is interdependent, with the effect that a certain level of helping is self-serving. In sum, intermediate levels of mutual helping are expected in nature, while efficient partner monitoring may allow reaching higher levels.

The evolution of altruistic social preferences in human groups

In this paper, we consider three hypotheses to account for the evolution of the extraordinary capacity for large-scale cooperation and altruistic social preferences within human societies. One hypothesis is that human cooperation is built on the same evolutionary foundations as cooperation in other animal societies, and that fundamental elements of the social preferences that shape our species' cooperative behaviour are also shared with other closely related primates. Another hypothesis is that selective pressures favouring cooperative breeding have shaped the capacity for cooperation and the development of social preferences, and produced a common set of behavioural dispositions and social preferences in cooperatively breeding primates and humans. The third hypothesis is that humans have evolved derived capacities for collaboration, group-level cooperation and altruistic social preferences that are linked to our capacity for culture. We draw on naturalistic data to assess differences in the form, scope and scale of cooperation between humans and other primates, experimental data to evaluate the nature of social preferences across primate species, and comparative analyses to evaluate the evolutionary origins of cooperative breeding and related forms of behaviour.

Interactional synchrony in chimpanzees: Examination through a finger-tapping experiment

Humans often unconsciously coordinate behaviour with that of others in daily life. This interpersonal coordination, including mimicry and interactional synchrony, has been suggested to play a fundamental role in social interaction. If this coordinative behavior is socially adaptive, it may be shared with other highly social animal species. The current study targeted chimpanzees, which phylogenetically are the closest living relatives of humans and live in complex social groups, and examined whether interactional synchrony would emerge in pairs of chimpanzees when auditory information about a partner's movement was provided. A finger-tapping task was introduced via touch panels to elicit repetitive and rhythmic movement from each chimpanzee. We found that one of four chimpanzees produced significant changes in both tapping tempo and timing of the tapping relative to its partner's tap when auditory sounds were provided. Although the current results may have limitations in generalizing to chimpanzees as a species, we suggest that a finger-tapping task is one potential method to investigate interactional synchrony in chimpanzees under a laboratory setup.

Rats prefer mutual rewards in a prosocial choice task

Pro-sociality, i.e., the preference for outcomes that produce benefits for other individuals, is ubiquitous in humans. Recently, cross-species comparisons of social behavior have offered important new insights into the evolution of pro-sociality. Here, we present a rodent analog of the Pro-social Choice Task that controls strategic components, de-confounds other-regarding choice motives from the animals' natural tendencies to maximize own food access and directly tests the effect of social context on choice allocation. We trained pairs of rats—an actor and a partner rat—in a double T-maze task where actors decided between two alternatives only differing in the reward delivered to the partner. The “own reward” choice yielded a reward only accessible to the actor whereas the “both reward” choice produced an additional reward for a partner (partner condition) or an inanimate toy (toy Condition), located in an adjacent compartment. We found that actors chose “both reward” at levels above chance and more often in the partner than in the toy condition. Moreover, we show that this choice pattern adapts to the current social context and that the observed behavior is stable over time.

Selective and contagious prosocial resource donation in capuchin monkeys, chimpanzees and humans

Prosocial acts benefitting others are widespread amongst humans. By contrast, chimpanzees have failed to demonstrate such a disposition in several studies, leading some authors to conclude that the forms of prosociality studied evolved in humans since our common ancestry. However, similar prosocial behavior has since been documented in other primates, such as capuchin monkeys. Here, applying the same methodology to humans, chimpanzees, and capuchins, we provide evidence that all three species will display prosocial behavior, but only in certain conditions. Fundamental forms of prosociality were age-dependent in children, conditional on self-beneficial resource distributions even at age seven, and conditional on social or resource configurations in chimpanzees and capuchins. We provide the first evidence that experience of conspecific companions' prosocial behavior facilitates prosocial behavior in children and chimpanzees. Prosocial actions were manifested in all three species following rules of contingency that may reflect strategically adaptive responses.

Lack of prosociality in great apes, capuchin monkeys and spider monkeys: convergent evidence from two different food distribution tasks

Prosociality can be defined as any behaviour performed to alleviate the needs of others or to improve their welfare. Prosociality has probably played an essential role in the evolution of cooperative behaviour and several studies have already investigated it in primates to understand the evolutionary origins of human prosociality. Two main tasks have been used to test prosociality in a food context. In the Platforms task, subjects can prosocially provide food to a partner by selecting a prosocial platform over a selfish one. In the Tokens task, subjects can prosocially provide food to a partner by selecting a prosocial token over a selfish one. As these tasks have provided mixed results, we used both tasks to test prosociality in great apes, capuchin monkeys and spider monkeys. Our results provided no compelling evidence of prosociality in a food context in any of the species tested. Additionally, our study revealed serious limitations of the Tokens task as it has been previously used. These results highlight the importance of controlling for confounding variables and of using multiple tasks to address inconsistencies present in the literature.

Task design influences prosociality in captive chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes)

Chimpanzees confer benefits on group members, both in the wild and in captive populations. Experimental studies of how animals allocate resources can provide useful insights about the motivations underlying prosocial behavior, and understanding the relationship between task design and prosocial behavior provides an important foundation for future research exploring these animals' social preferences. A number of studies have been designed to assess chimpanzees' preferences for outcomes that benefit others (prosocial preferences), but these studies vary greatly in both the results obtained and the methods used, and in most cases employ procedures that reduce critical features of naturalistic social interactions, such as partner choice. The focus of the current study is on understanding the link between experimental methodology and prosocial behavior in captive chimpanzees, rather than on describing these animals' social motivations themselves. We introduce a task design that avoids isolating subjects and allows them to freely decide whether to participate in the experiment. We explore key elements of the methods utilized in previous experiments in an effort to evaluate two possibilities that have been offered to explain why different experimental designs produce different results: (a) chimpanzees are less likely to deliver food to others when they obtain food for themselves, and (b) evidence of prosociality may be obscured by more “complex” experimental apparatuses (e.g., those including more components or alternative choices). Our results suggest that the complexity of laboratory tasks may generate observed variation in prosocial behavior in laboratory experiments, and highlights the need for more naturalistic research designs while also providing one example of such a paradigm.

Does sympathy motivate prosocial behaviour in great apes?

Prosocial behaviours such as helping, comforting, or sharing are central to human social life. Because they emerge early in ontogeny, it has been proposed that humans are prosocial by nature and that from early on empathy and sympathy motivate such behaviours. The emerging question is whether humans share these abilities to feel with and for someone with our closest relatives, the great apes. Although several studies demonstrated that great apes help others, little is known about their underlying motivations. This study addresses this issue and investigates whether four species of great apes (Pongo pygmaeus, Gorilla gorilla, Pan troglodytes, Pan paniscus) help a conspecific more after observing the conspecific being harmed (a human experimenter steals the conspecific’s food) compared to a condition where no harming occurred. Results showed that in regard to the occurrence of prosocial behaviours, only orangutans, but not the African great apes, help others when help is needed, contrasting prior findings on chimpanzees. However, with the exception of one population of orangutans that helped significantly more after a conspecific was harmed than when no harm occurred, prosocial behaviour in great apes was not motivated by concern for others.

Preschool children fail primate prosocial game because of attentional task demands

Various nonhuman primate species have been tested with prosocial games (i.e. derivates from dictator games) in order to better understand the evolutionary origin of proactive prosociality in humans. Results of these efforts are mixed, and it is difficult to disentangle true species differences from methodological artifacts. We tested 2- to 5-year-old children with a costly and a cost-free version of a prosocial game that differ with regard to the payoff distribution and are widely used with nonhuman primates. Simultaneously, we assessed the subjects' level of Theory of Mind understanding. Prosocial behavior was demonstrated with the prosocial game, and did not increase with more advanced Theory of Mind understanding. However, prosocial behavior could only be detected with the costly version of the game, whereas the children failed the cost-free version that is most commonly used with nonhuman primates. A detailed comparison of the children's behavior in the two versions of the game indicates that the failure was due to higher attentional demands of the cost-free version, rather than to a lack of prosociality per se. Our results thus show (i) that subtle differences in prosociality tasks can substantially bias the outcome and thus prevent meaningful species comparisons, and (ii) that like in nonhuman primates, prosocial behavior in human children does not require advanced Theory of Mind understanding in the present context. However, both developmental and comparative psychology accumulate increasing evidence for the multidimensionality of prosocial behaviors, suggesting that different forms of prosociality are also regulated differentially. For future efforts to understand the evolutionary origin of prosociality it is thus crucial to take this heterogeneity into account.

A mechatronic platform for behavioral analysis on nonhuman primates

In this work we present a new mechatronic platform for measuring behavior of nonhuman primates, allowing high reprogrammability and providing several possibilities of interactions. The platform is the result of a multidisciplinary design process, which has involved bio-engineers, developmental neuroscientists, primatologists, and roboticians to identify its main requirements and specifications. Although such a platform has been designed for the behavioral analysis of capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella), it can be used for behavioral studies on other nonhuman primates and children. First, a state-of-the-art principal approach used in nonhuman primate behavioral studies is reported. Second, the main advantages of the mechatronic approach are presented. In this section, the platform is described in all its parts and the possibility to use it for studies on learning mechanism based on intrinsic motivation discussed. Third, a pilot study on capuchin monkeys is provided and preliminary data are presented and discussed.

Monkeys benefit from reciprocity without the cognitive burden

The debate about the origins of human prosociality has focused on the presence or absence of similar tendencies in other species, and, recently, attention has turned to the underlying mechanisms. We investigated whether direct reciprocity could promote prosocial behavior in brown capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella). Twelve capuchins tested in pairs could choose between two tokens, with one being "prosocial" in that it rewarded both individuals (i.e., 1/1), and the other being "selfish" in that it rewarded the chooser only (i.e., 1/0). Each monkey's choices with a familiar partner from their own group was compared with choices when paired with a partner from a different group. Capuchins were spontaneously prosocial, selecting the prosocial option at the same rate regardless of whether they were paired with an in-group or out-group partner. This indicates that interaction outside of the experimental setting played no role. When the paradigm was changed, such that both partners alternated making choices, prosocial preference significantly increased, leading to mutualistic payoffs. As no contingency could be detected between an individual's choice and their partner's previous choice, and choices occurred in rapid succession, reciprocity seemed of a relatively vague nature akin to mutualism. Having the partner receive a better reward than the chooser (i.e., 1/2) during the alternating condition increased the payoffs of mutual prosociality, and prosocial choice increased accordingly. The outcome of several controls made it hard to explain these results on the basis of reward distribution or learned preferences, and rather suggested that joint action promotes prosociality, resulting in so-called attitudinal reciprocity.

Recipients affect prosocial and altruistic choices in jackdaws, Corvus monedula

Other-regarding preferences are a critical feature of human cooperation but to what extent non-human animals exhibit these preferences is a matter of intense discussion. We tested whether jackdaws show prosocial behaviour (providing benefits to others at no cost to themselves) and altruism (providing benefits to others while incurring costs) with both sibling and non-sibling recipients. In the prosocial condition, a box was baited on both the actor's and the recipient's side (1/1 option), whereas another box provided food only for the actor (1/0 option). In the altruistic condition, the boxes contained food for either the actor (1/0 option) or the recipient (0/1 option). The proportion of selfish (1/0 option) and cooperative (1/1 and 0/1 option, respectively) actors' choices was significantly affected by the recipients' behaviour. If recipients approached the boxes first and positioned themselves next to the box baited on their side, trying to access the food reward (recipient-first trials), actors were significantly more cooperative than when the actors approached the boxes first and made their choice prior to the recipients' arrival (actor-first trials). Further, in recipient-first trials actors were more cooperative towards recipients of the opposite sex, an effect that was even more pronounced in the altruistic condition. Hence, at no cost to the actors, all recipients could significantly influence the actors' behaviour, whereas at high costs this could be achieved even more so by recipients of different sex. Local/stimulus enhancement is discussed as the most likely cognitive mechanism to account for these effects.

Chimpanzees' flexible targeted helping based on an understanding of conspecifics' goals

Humans extensively help others altruistically, which plays an important role in maintaining cooperative societies. Although some nonhuman animals are also capable of helping others altruistically, humans are considered unique in our voluntary helping and our variety of helping behaviors. Many still believe that this is because only humans can understand others' goals due to our unique "theory of mind" abilities, especially shared intentionality. However, we know little of the cognitive mechanisms underlying helping in nonhuman animals, especially if and how they understand others' goals. The present study provides the empirical evidence for flexible targeted helping depending on conspecifics' needs in chimpanzees. The subjects of this study selected an appropriate tool from a random set of seven objects to transfer to a conspecific partner confronted with differing tool-use situations, indicating that they understood what their partner needed. This targeted helping, (i.e., selecting the appropriate tool to transfer), was observed only when the helpers could visually assess their partner's situation. If visual access was obstructed, the chimpanzees still tried to help their partner upon request, but failed to select and donate the appropriate tool needed by their partner. These results suggest that the limitation in chimpanzees' voluntary helping is not necessarily due to failure in understanding others' goals. Chimpanzees can understand conspecifics' goals and demonstrate cognitively advanced targeted helping as long as they are able to visually evaluate their conspecifics' predicament. However, they will seldom help others without direct request for help.

Spontaneous prosocial choice by chimpanzees

The study of human and primate altruism faces an evolutionary anomaly: There is ample evidence for altruistic preferences in our own species and growing evidence in monkeys, but one of our closest relatives, the chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes), is viewed as a reluctant altruist, acting only in response to pressure and solicitation. Although chimpanzee prosocial behavior has been reported both in observational captive studies and in the wild, thus far Prosocial Choice Tests have failed to produce evidence. However, methodologies of previous Prosocial Choice Tests may have handicapped the apes unintentionally. Here we present findings of a paradigm in which chimpanzees chose between two differently colored tokens: one "selfish" token resulting in a reward for the actor only (1/0), and the other "prosocial" token rewarding both the actor and a partner (1/1). Seven female chimpanzees, each tested with three different partners, showed a significant bias for the prosocial option. Prosocial choices occurred both in response to solicitation by the partner and spontaneously without solicitation. However, directed requests and pressure by the partner reduced the actor's prosocial tendency. These results draw into question previous conclusions indicating that chimpanzees have a limited sensitivity to the needs of others and behave prosocially only in response to significant prompting.

Evolutionary foundations of human prosocial sentiments

A growing body of evidence shows that humans are remarkably altruistic primates. Food sharing and division of labor play an important role in all human societies, and cooperation extends beyond the bounds of close kinship and networks of reciprocating partners. In humans, altruism is motivated at least in part by empathy and concern for the welfare of others. Although altruistic behavior is well-documented in other primates, the range of altruistic behaviors in other primate species, including the great apes, is much more limited than it is in humans. Moreover, when altruism does occur among other primates, it is typically limited to familiar group members--close kin, mates, and reciprocating partners. This suggests that there may be fundamental differences in the social preferences that motivate altruism across the primate order, and there is currently considerable interest in how we came to be such unusual apes. A body of experimental studies designed to examine the phylogenetic range of prosocial sentiments and behavior is beginning to shed some light on this issue. In experimental settings, chimpanzees and tamarins do not consistently take advantage of opportunities to deliver food rewards to others, although capuchins and marmosets do deliver food rewards to others in similar kinds of tasks. Although chimpanzees do not satisfy experimental criteria for prosociality in food delivery tasks, they help others complete tasks to obtain a goal. Differences in performance across species and differences in performance across tasks are not yet fully understood and raise new questions for further study.