Chimpanzees help each other upon request

The expression of empathy in human's closest relatives, bonobos and chimpanzees: current and future directions

Empathy is a complex, multi-dimensional capacity that facilitates the sharing and understanding of others' emotions. As our closest living relatives, bonobos (Pan paniscus) and chimpanzees (P. troglodytes) provide an opportunity to explore the origins of hominin social cognition, including empathy. Despite certain assumptions that bonobos and chimpanzees may differ empathically, these species appear to overlap considerably in certain socio-emotional responses related to empathy. However, few studies have systematically tested for species variation in Pan empathic or socio-emotional tendencies. To address this, we synthesise the growing literature on Pan empathy to inform our understanding of the selection pressures that may underlie the evolution of hominin empathy, and its expression in our last common ancestor. As bonobos and chimpanzees show overlaps in their expression of complex socio-emotional phenomena such as empathy, we propose that group comparisons may be as or more meaningful than species comparisons when it comes to understanding the evolutionary pressures for such behaviour. Furthermore, key differences, such as how humans and Pan communicate, appear to distinguish how we experience empathy compared to our closest living relatives.

Behavioral responses of vervet monkey Chlorocebus pygerythrus infants in a novel fostering program

Vervet monkeys (Chlorocebus pygerythrus) are considered pests by farmers and homeowners. Consequent attempts to exterminate problem adult vervet monkeys often result in orphaned young offspring, which are sometimes taken to wildlife rehabilitation centers. We assessed the success of a novel fostering program at the Vervet Monkey Foundation, South Africa. Nine orphaned vervet monkeys were fostered to adult conspecific females of existing troops at the Foundation. The fostering protocol focused on reducing the time orphans spent in human rearing and involved a stepwise process of integration. We recorded the behaviors of orphans, including their interactions with their foster mother, to assess the process of fostering. Fostering success was high (89%). Orphans maintained close association with the foster mother and had little or no socio-negative and abnormal behavior. Comparison with literature showed a similar high fostering success in another vervet monkey study, regardless of the period and level of human-caregiving, and it is apparent that the duration of human care is less important than the protocol used for fostering. Nonetheless, our study has conservation relevance for vervet monkey rehabilitation.

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.

Family first! Influence of parental investment in Guinea pigs (Cavia porcellus) prosocial choices

Literature often assumed that prosocial behaviours (behaviours that benefit others with or without a cost for the actor) would have evolved many species to improve the effectiveness of parental care (Decety and Cowell 2014). While this hypothesis is rarely questioned at a phylogenetic scale, it was never tested at an individual scale to the best of our knowledge. Therefore, we chose to study the impact of effective parental care on prosociality by comparing the prosocial tendencies of Guinea pigs before mating, during mating and after parturition. We conducted Prosocial Choice Tests on three groups of Guinea pigs (males, multiparous females, and nulliparous females). Subjects had to choose between three options: a prosocial option (subject and recipient being rewarded), a selfish option (only subject was rewarded), and a null option (no reward). Our results showed high prosociality towards their mating partner and their young both in male and in female subjects. Males became selfish towards other males after parturition. Among other interesting results, we found a direct reciprocity phenomenon. We also highlighted an ability in our subjects to consider both the identity and relationship shared with the recipient, such as tolerance (enhancing prosociality), dominance rank (being tested with a dominant recipient increasing selfish responses), and its behaviour (begging calls eliciting prosociality, while threatening ones decreasing it), to choose an option. These findings suggested that prosociality could be modulated by many factors and that the constraints and stakes induced by breeding would highly influence prosocial strategies.

Prosocial behavior in competitive fish: the case of the archerfish

Humans are social creatures, demonstrate prosocial behaviors, and are sensitive to the actions and consequent payoff of others. This social sensitivity has also been found in many other species, though not in all. Research has suggested that prosocial tendencies are more pronounced in naturally cooperative species whose social structure requires a high level of interdependence and allomaternal care. The present study challenges this assumption by demonstrating, in a laboratory setting, that archerfish, competitive by nature, preferred targets rewarding both themselves and their tankmates, but only when the payoff was equal. With no tankmate on the other side of the partition, they exhibited no obvious preference. Finding evidence for prosocial behavior and negative responses to unequal distribution of reward to the advantage of the other fish suggests that in a competitive social environment, being prosocial may be the most adaptive strategy for personal survival, even if it benefits others as well.

Does tolerance allow bonobos to outperform chimpanzees on a cooperative task? A conceptual replication of Hare et al., 2007

Across various taxa, social tolerance is thought to facilitate cooperation, and many species are treated as having species-specific patterns of social tolerance. Yet studies that assess wild and captive bonobos and chimpanzees result in contrasting findings. By replicating a cornerstone experimental study on tolerance and cooperation in bonobos and chimpanzees (Hare et al. 2007 Cur. Biol. 17, 619-623 (doi:10.1016/j.cub.2007.02.040)), we aim to further our understanding of current discrepant findings. We tested bonobos and chimpanzees housed at the same facility in a co-feeding and cooperation task. Food was placed on dishes located on both ends or in the middle of a platform. In the co-feeding task, the tray was simply made available to the ape duos, whereas in the cooperation task the apes had to simultaneously pull at both ends of a rope attached to the platform to retrieve the food. By contrast to the published findings, bonobos and chimpanzees co-fed to a similar degree, indicating a similar level of tolerance. However, bonobos cooperated more than chimpanzees when the food was monopolizable, which replicates the original study. Our findings call into question the interpretation that at the species level bonobos cooperate to a higher degree because they are inherently more tolerant.

Why help others? Insights from rodent to human early childhood research

Helping behavior are actions aiming at assisting another individual in need or to relieve their distress. The occurrence of this behavior not only depends on automated physiological mechanisms, such as imitation or emotional contagion, that is, the individual's emotion and physiological state matching with others, but also needs motivation to sustain. From a comparative and developmental perspective, we discover that the motivation for helping behavior has a deep foundation both phylogenetically and ontogenetically. For example, empathic concern for others, relieving personal distress and the desire for social contact are universal motivations across rodents, non-human primates and human early childhoods. Therefore, a circle-layered model integrating evidences for motivation for helping behavior from rodent to human early childhood research is proposed: the inner circle contains the emotional-behavioral system and the outer circle contains the affective-cognitive system. The application of this model has significance for both behavioral neuroscience research and cultivating prosocial behavior in human society.

When and how do non-human great apes communicate to support cooperation?

Several scholars have long suggested that human language and remarkable communicative abilities originate from the need and motivation to cooperate and coordinate actions with others. Yet, little work has focused on when and how great apes communicate during joint action tasks, partly because of the widely held assumption that animal communication is mostly manipulative, but also because non-human great apes' default motivation seems to be competitive rather than cooperative. Here, we review experimental cooperative tasks and show how situational challenges and the degree of asymmetry in terms of knowledge relevant for the joint action task affect the likelihood of communication. We highlight how physical proximity and strength of social bond between the participants affect the occurrence and type of communication. Lastly, we highlight how, from a production point of view, communicators appear capable of calibrating their signalling and controlling their delivery, showing clear evidence of first-order intentionality. On the other hand, recipients appear to struggle in terms of making use of referential information received. We discuss different hypotheses accounting for this asymmetry and provide suggestions concerning how future work could help us unveil to what degree the need for cooperation has shaped our closest living relatives' communicative behaviour.

This article is part of the theme issue ‘Revisiting the human ‘interaction engine’: comparative approaches to social action coordination’.

Multimodal cues displayed by submissive rats promote prosocial choices by dominants

Animals often display prosocial behaviors, performing actions that benefit others. Although prosociality is essential for social bonding and cooperation, we still know little about how animals integrate behavioral cues from those in need to make decisions that increase their well-being. To address this question, we used a two-choice task where rats can provide rewards to a conspecific in the absence of self-benefit and investigated which conditions promote prosociality by manipulating the social context of the interacting animals. Although sex or degree of familiarity did not affect prosocial choices in rats, social hierarchy revealed to be a potent modulator, with dominant decision-makers showing faster emergence and higher levels of prosocial choices toward their submissive cage mates. Leveraging quantitative analysis of multimodal social dynamics prior to choice, we identified that pairs with dominant decision-makers exhibited more proximal interactions. Interestingly, these closer interactions were driven by submissive animals that modulated their position and movement following their dominants and whose 50-kHz vocalization rate correlated with dominants' prosociality. Moreover, Granger causality revealed stronger bidirectional influences in pairs with dominant focals and submissive recipients, indicating increased behavioral coordination. Finally, multivariate analysis highlighted body language as the main information dominants use on a trial-by-trial basis to learn that their actions have effects on others. Our results provide a refined understanding of the behavioral dynamics that rats use for action-selection upon perception of socially relevant cues and navigate social decision-making.

Horses with sustained attention follow the pointing of a human who knows where food is hidden

When interacting with humans, domesticated species may respond to communicative gestures, such as pointing. However, it is currently unknown, except for in dogs, if species comprehend the communicative nature of such cues. Here, we investigated whether horses could follow the pointing of a human informant by evaluating the credibility of the information about the food-hiding place provided by the pointing of two informants. Using an object-choice task, we manipulated the attentional state of the two informants during food-hiding events and differentiated their knowledge about the location of the hidden food. Furthermore, we investigated the horses’ visual attention levels towards human behaviour to evaluate the relationship between their motivation and their performance of the task. The result showed that horses that sustained high attention levels could evaluate the credibility of the information and followed the pointing of an informant who knew where food was hidden (Z =  − 2.281, P = 0.002, n = 36). This suggests that horses are highly sensitive to the attentional state and pointing gestures of humans, and that they perceive pointing as a communicative cue. This study also indicates that the motivation for the task should be investigated to determine the socio-cognitive abilities of animals.

Individual Goffin´s cockatoos (Cacatua goffiniana) show flexible targeted helping in a tool transfer task

Flexible targeted helping is considered an advanced form of prosocial behavior in hominoids, as it requires the actor to assess different situations that a conspecific may be in, and to subsequently flexibly satisfy different needs of that partner depending on the nature of those situations. So far, apart from humans such behaviour has only been experimentally shown in chimpanzees and in Eurasian jays. Recent studies highlight the prosocial tendencies of several bird species, yet flexible targeted helping remained untested, largely due to methodological issues as such tasks are generally designed around tool-use, and very few bird species are capable of tool-use. Here, we tested Goffin's cockatoos, which proved to be skilled tool innovators in captivity, in a tool transfer task in which an actor had access to four different objects/tools and a partner to one of two different apparatuses that each required one of these tools to retrieve a reward. As expected from this species, we recorded playful object transfers across all conditions. Yet, importantly and similar to apes, three out of eight birds transferred the correct tool more often in the test condition than in a condition that also featured an apparatus but no partner. Furthermore, one of these birds transferred that correct tool first more often before transferring any other object in the test condition than in the no-partner condition, while the other two cockatoos were marginally non-significantly more likely to do so. Additionally, there was no difference in the likelihood of the correct tool being transferred first for either of the two apparatuses, suggesting that these birds flexibly adjusted what to transfer based on their partner´s need. Future studies should focus on explanations for the intra-specific variation of this behaviour, and should test other parrots and other large-brained birds to see how this can be generalized across the class and to investigate the evolutionary history of this trait.

On experimental tests for studying altruism in capuchin monkeys

Altruism is often considered as the ultimate form of prosociality and is defined as any act that benefits others without direct benefit to the actor. Many nonhuman species have been reported to express different forms of altruism, although their expression in experimental studies is highly dependent on the paradigm used. Tufted capuchin monkeys are one of the most studied species; however, the evidence for altruism in this species remains inconclusive. This study aimed to investigate whether two paradigms, adapted from those in which great apes have shown altruism, could be useful for revealing signs of altruistic capabilities in capuchins. Pairs of monkeys were tested in two experiments involving a similar mechanism but with different costs to acting altruistically. The first used a more costly operant sharing task in which an operator could unlock a door to allow a recipient to enter the room and share his food. The second consisted of a less costly helping task, in which the operator's food was secured but he could help the recipient to get other food that was in a locked container. The results suggest that capuchins, although apparently unwilling to share their food in a costly operant situation, might altruistically help selected recipients, in response to requesting by the latter. While our small sample size along with procedural limitations preclude firm conclusions, we discuss how further ameliorations of our tasks could further contribute to the study of altruistic capacities in primates.

Current rodent models for the study of empathic processes

Empathy is a complex phenomenon critical for group survival and societal bonds. In addition, there is mounting evidence demonstrating empathic behaviors are dysregulated in a multitude of psychiatric disorders ranging from autism spectrum disorder, substance use disorders, and personality disorders. Therefore, understanding the underlying drive and neurobiology of empathy is paramount for improving the treatment outcomes and quality of life for individuals suffering from these psychiatric disorders. While there is a growing list of human studies, there is still much about empathy to understand, likely due to both its complexity and the inherent limitations of imaging modalities. It is therefore imperative to develop, validate, and utilize rodent models of empathic behaviors as translational tools to explore this complex topic in ways human research cannot. This review outlines some of the more prevailing theories of empathy, lists some of the psychiatric disorders with disrupted empathic processes, describes rat and mouse models of empathic behaviors currently used, and discusses ways in which these models have elucidated social, environmental, and neurobiological factors that may modulate empathy. The research tools afforded to rodent models will provide an increasingly clear translational understanding of empathic processes and consequently result in improvements in care for those diagnosed with any one of the many psychiatric disorders.

Prosociality and reciprocity in bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus)

Some moral behaviours, often regarded as reflecting high cognitive abilities (such as empathy, cooperation, targeted helping) are known to only be present in very few species, like great apes, elephants and cetaceans. Prosocial behaviours (producing a benefit for the recipient without necessarily involving a cost for the actor) have been mostly found in primates and, more recently, in elephants. Despite dolphins' reputation for helping their conspecifics, experimental studies about their prosocial and empathic abilities are rare. We conducted Prosocial Choice Tests in six bottlenose dolphins. The subjects had to choose between three objects: choosing the prosocial object induced the simultaneous rewarding of both the subject and a recipient individual; choosing the selfish object induced a reward only for the subject; choosing the null one did not reward anyone. We found prosociality and direct reciprocity in our subjects, and our results suggested that bottlenose dolphins might be able to modulate their prosocial and reciprocal tendencies according to partner-specific information. Subjects seemed to be more prosocial towards the other sex and more reciprocal towards same-sex recipients. This reciprocity might be underpinned by the same features that rule their behaviours in the wild (cooperating with same sex conspecifics). Moreover, an audience effect was reported, as the presence of the subject's young increased subjects' likelihood of prosocial response. Our findings highlighted that prosociality could appear in taxa other than primates, suggesting a convergent evolutionary phenomenon.

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.

Azure-winged magpies' decisions to share food are contingent on the presence or absence of food for the recipient

Helping others is a key feature of human behavior. However, recent studies render this feature not uniquely human, and describe discoveries of prosocial behavior in non-human primates, other social mammals, and most recently in some bird species. Nevertheless, the cognitive underpinnings of this prosociality; i.e., whether animals take others’ need for help into account, often remain obscured. In this study, we take a first step in investigating prosociality in azure-winged magpies by presenting them with the opportunity to share highly desired food with their conspecifics i) in a situation in which these conspecifics had no such food, ii) in a situation in which they too had access to that highly desired food, and iii) in an open, base-line, situation where all had equal access to the same food and could move around freely. We find that azure-winged magpies regularly share high-value food items, preferably with, but not restricted to, members of the opposite sex. Most notably, we find that these birds, and specifically the females, seem to differentiate between whether others have food or do not have food, and subsequently cater to that lack. Begging calls by those without food seem to function as cues that elicit the food-sharing, but the response to that begging is condition-dependent. Moreover, analyses on a restricted dataset that excluded those events in which there was begging showed exactly the same patterns, raising the possibility that the azure-winged magpies might truly notice when others have access to fewer resources (even in the absence of vocal cues). This sharing behavior could indicate a high level of social awareness and prosociality that should be further investigated. Further studies are needed to establish the order of intentionality at play in this system, and whether azure-winged magpies might be able to attribute desire states to their conspecifics.

A gift for gratitude and cooperative behavior: brain and cognitive effects

Recently, different psychological studies have been interested in identifying the factors that regulate the development and maintenance of long-lasting interpersonal and social relationships. Specifically, the present research explored the link between gift exchange, gratitude and cognitive effects. The behavioral performance and neural activity of 32 participants were recorded during a cooperative game to be played before and after gift exchange. Specifically, participants had to perform the task coupled with a dear friend. Half of the couples were asked to exchange a gift before the task performance; the other half was asked to exchange a gift halfway through the task performance. For hemodynamic brain responses, functional near-infrared spectroscopy was used. Results showed that an increase in cognitive performance occurred after the exchange of gifts, with improved accuracy and lower response times in task performance. Regarding hemodynamic responses, an increase in oxygenated hemoglobin was detected, especially in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex following the gift exchange. Furthermore, it was observed that gift exchange before the beginning of the task increased the performance level. The present study provides a significant contribution to the identification of those factors that enable the increased cognitive performance based on cooperative relationships.

How animals collaborate: Underlying proximate mechanisms

Collaboration or social interactions in which two or more individuals coordinate their behavior to produce outcomes from which both individuals benefit are common in nature. Individuals from many species hunt together, defend their territory, and form coalitions in intragroup competition. However, we still know very little about the proximate mechanisms underlying these behaviors. Recent theories of human cognitive evolution have emphasized the role collaboration may have played in the selection of socio-cognitive skills. It has been argued that the capacity to form shared goals and joint intentions with others, is what allows humans to collaborate so flexibly and efficiently. Although there is no evidence that nonhuman animals are capable of shared intentionality, there is conceivably a wide range of proximate mechanisms that support forms of, potentially flexible, collaboration in other species. We review the experimental literature with the aim of evaluating what we know about how other species achieve collaboration; with a particular focus on chimpanzees. We structure the review with a new categorization of collaborative behavior that focuses on whether individuals intentionally coordinate actions with others. We conclude that for a wider comparative perspective we need more data from other species but the findings so far suggest that chimpanzees, and possibly other great apes, are capable of understanding the causal role of a partner in collaboration. This article is categorized under: Cognitive Biology > Evolutionary Roots of Cognition Psychology > Comparative Psychology.

The smell of hunger: Norway rats provision social partners based on odour cues of need

When individuals exchange helpful acts reciprocally, increasing the benefit of the receiver can enhance its propensity to return a favour, as pay-offs are typically correlated in iterated interactions. Therefore, reciprocally cooperating animals should consider the relative benefit for the receiver when deciding to help a conspecific. Norway rats (Rattus norvegicus) exchange food reciprocally and thereby take into account both the cost of helping and the potential benefit to the receiver. By using a variant of the sequential iterated prisoner’s dilemma paradigm, we show that rats may determine the need of another individual by olfactory cues alone. In an experimental food-exchange task, test subjects were provided with odour cues from hungry or satiated conspecifics located in a different room. Our results show that wild-type Norway rats provide help to a stooge quicker when they receive odour cues from a hungry rather than from a satiated conspecific. Using chemical analysis by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS), we identify seven volatile organic compounds that differ in their abundance between hungry and satiated rats. Combined, this “smell of hunger” can apparently serve as a reliable cue of need in reciprocal cooperation, which supports the hypothesis of honest signalling.

Rats provide more food to hungry fellow rats than to satiated ones. This study shows that a rat can assess the need of their partner using odor cues alone, and identifies the volatile organic compounds responsible for this "smell of hunger," a potential example of honest signalling.

Gorillas' (Gorilla g. gorilla) knowledge of conspecifics' affordances: intraspecific social tool use for food acquisition

The use of tools, long thought to be uniquely human, has now been observed in other animal taxa including several species of birds, non-primate mammals as well as some non-human primate species. Chimpanzees, one of humankind’s closest living relatives, exceed all other non-human animal species as they have been reported to use an exceptionally large toolkit. However, relatively little is known about the tool-use skills of the other great ape species. While the majority of tools described are inanimate objects, the use of social tools has received relatively little attention. Here we provide the first evidence of naturally occurring spontaneous exploitative behaviour of a conspecific as a social tool for food acquisition in non-human animals. We observed gorillas in captivity utilising a conspecific as a ladder to gain access to unreachable food. We discuss our findings in the light of other studies on social tool use and suggest the need for more nuanced interpretations of gorillas’ cognitive skills.

Chimpanzee Coordination and Potential Communication in a Two-touchscreen Turn-taking Game

Recent years have seen a growing interest in the question of whether and how groups of nonhuman primates coordinate their behaviors for mutual benefit. On the one hand, it has been shown that chimpanzees in the wild and in captivity can solve various coordination problems. On the other hand, evidence of communication in the context of coordination problems is scarce. Here, we investigated how pairs of chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) solved a problem of dynamically coordinating their actions for achieving a joint goal. We presented five pairs of chimpanzees with a turn-taking coordination game, where the task was to send a virtual target from one computer display to another using two touch-screens. During the joint practice of the game some subjects exhibited spontaneous gesturing. To address the question whether these gestures were produced to sustain coordination, we introduced a joint test condition in which we simulated a coordination break-down scenario: subjects appeared either unwilling or unable to return the target to their partner. The frequency of gesturing was significantly higher in these test trials than in the regular trials. Our results suggest that at least in some contexts chimpanzees can exhibit communicative behaviors to sustain coordination in joint action.

Challenges in the comparative study of empathy and related phenomena in animals

The aim of this review is to discuss recent arguments and findings in the comparative study of empathy. Based on a multidisciplinary approach including psychology and ethology, we review the non-human animal literature concerning theoretical frameworks, methodology, and research outcomes. One specific objective is to highlight discrepancies between theory and empirical findings, and to discuss ambiguities present in current data and their interpretation. In particular, we focus on emotional contagion and its experimental investigation, and on consolation and targeted helping as measures for sympathy. Additionally, we address the feasibility of comparing across species with behavioural data alone. One main conclusion of our review is that animal research on empathy still faces the challenge of closing the gap between theoretical concepts and empirical evidence. To advance our knowledge, we propose to focus more on the emotional basis of empathy, rather than on possibly ambiguous behavioural indicators, and we provide suggestions to overcome the limitations of previous research .

Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) tolerate some degree of inequity while cooperating but refuse to donate effort for nothing

In cooperative hunting, a carcass cannot be divided equally, and hunts may be unsuccessful. We studied how chimpanzees respond to these two variables, working for unequal rewards and no rewards, which have been rarely included in experimental cooperative tasks. We presented chimpanzees with a task requiring three chimpanzees to work together and varied the reward structure in two separate experiments. In Experiment 1, two individuals received more rewards than the third, making the outcome unequal. We wanted to know if cooperation would continue or break down, and what mechanisms might maintain performance. Experiment 2 used equal rewards, but this time one or more locations were left unbaited on a proportion of trials. Thus, there was a chance of individuals working to receive nothing. In Experiment 1, the chimpanzees worked at a high rate, tolerating the unequal outcomes, with rank appearing to determine who got access to the higher-value locations. However, equal outcomes (used as a control) enhanced cooperative performance, most likely through motivational processes rather than the absence of inequity aversion. In Experiment 2, performance dropped off dramatically when the chimpanzees were not rewarded on every trial. Their strategy was irrational as donating effort would have led to more rewards in the long run for each individual. Our results lead to a hierarchy of performances by condition with equity > inequity > donating effort. Chimpanzees therefore tolerate mild inequity, but cannot tolerate receiving nothing when others are rewarded.

Teaching varies with task complexity in wild chimpanzees

Understanding social influences on how apes acquire tool behaviors can help us model the evolution of culture and technology in humans. Humans scaffold novice tool skills with diverse strategies, including the transfer of tools between individuals. Chimpanzees transfer tools, and this behavior meets criteria for teaching. However, it is unclear how task complexity relates to this form of helping. Here, we find differences between 2 wild chimpanzee populations in rate, probability, and types of tool transfer during termite gathering. Chimpanzees showed greater helping in the population where termite gathering is a more complex tool task. In wild chimpanzees, as in humans, regular and active provisioning of learning opportunities may be essential to the cultural transmission of complex skills.

Cumulative culture is a transformative force in human evolution, but the social underpinnings of this capacity are debated. Identifying social influences on how chimpanzees acquire tool tasks of differing complexity may help illuminate the evolutionary origins of technology in our own lineage. Humans routinely transfer tools to novices to scaffold their skill development. While tool transfers occur in wild chimpanzees and fulfill criteria for teaching, it is unknown whether this form of helping varies between populations and across tasks. Applying standardized methods, we compared tool transfers during termite gathering by chimpanzees in the Goualougo Triangle, Republic of Congo, and in Gombe, Tanzania. At Goualougo, chimpanzees use multiple, different tool types sequentially, choose specific raw materials, and perform modifications that improve tool efficiency, which could make it challenging for novices to manufacture suitable tools. Termite gathering at Gombe involves a single tool type, fishing probes, which can be manufactured from various materials. Multiple measures indicated population differences in tool-transfer behavior. The rate of transfers and probability of transfer upon request were significantly higher at Goualougo, while resistance to transfers was significantly higher at Gombe. Active transfers of tools in which possessors moved to facilitate possession change upon request occurred only at Goualougo, where they were the most common transfer type. At Gombe, tool requests were typically refused. We suggest that these population differences in tool-transfer behavior may relate to task complexity and that active helping plays an enhanced role in the cultural transmission of complex technology in wild apes.

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.

Chimpanzees help others with what they want; children help them with what they need

Humans, including young children, are strongly motivated to help others, even paying a cost to do so. Humans' nearest primate relatives, great apes, are likewise motivated to help others, raising the question of whether the motivations of humans and apes are the same. Here we compared the underlying motivation to help in human children and chimpanzees. Both species understood the situation and helped a conspecific in a straightforward situation. However, when helpers knew that what the other was requesting would not actually help her, only children gave her what she needed instead of giving her what she requested. These results suggest that both chimpanzees and human children help others but the underlying motivation for why they help differs. In comparison to chimpanzees, young children help in a paternalistic manner. The evolutionary hypothesis is that uniquely human socio-ecologies based on interdependent cooperation gave rise to uniquely human prosocial motivations to help others paternalistically.

[Cell-type-specific targeting strategies for elucidating neural circuits and pathophysiological mechanisms in the marmoset brain]

As a primate animal model for neuroscience research, the common marmoset (Callithrix jacchus) provides an unprecedented opportunity to gain a better understanding of the human brain function and pathophysiology of neurological and psychiatric disorders, thereby helping in the diagnosis and treatment of those disorders. The marmoset is particularly useful in studying the neural mechanisms underlying social behavior, as their prosocial behavior and visual and vocal communication systems are well-developed. Despite recent advances in biotechnology such as the creation of genetically engineered marmosets, our understanding of the marmoset brain, including its dysfunction in disease, at the circuit level remains limited due to the lack of comprehensive knowledge of the neuronal connections in the marmoset brain. Here we describe the development of genetic and viral engineering techniques for a particular type of neuron in non-transgenic animals. These approaches, combined with rabies viral tracing, imaging, and electrophysiology, will make it possible to map the connectome and relate neuronal connectivity to function in the marmoset brain. Such circuit-level studies will open a new avenue for non-human primate research that can bridge the gap between basic research and human studies.

Wolves, but not dogs, are prosocial in a touch screen task

Prosociality is important for initiating cooperation. Interestingly, while wolves rely heavily on cooperation, dogs’ do so substantially less thus leading to the prediction that wolves are more prosocial than dogs. However, domestication hypotheses suggest dogs have been selected for higher cooperation, leading to the opposing prediction- increased prosocial tendencies in dogs. To tease apart these hypotheses we adapted a paradigm previously used with pet dogs to directly compare dogs and wolves. In a prosocial choice task, wolves acted prosocially to in-group partners; providing significantly more food to a pack-member compared to a control where the partner had no access to the food. Dogs did not. Additionally, wolves did not show a prosocial response to non-pack members, in line with previous research that social relationships are important for prosociality. In sum, when kept in the same conditions, wolves are more prosocial than their domestic counterpart, further supporting suggestions that reliance on cooperation is a driving force for prosocial attitudes.

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.

Conducta de ayuda en ratas: ¿acción o hábito?

En los últimos años, se han reportado varios estudios sobre la empatía en roedores. En particular, las tareas que evalúan los comportamientos de ayuda en ratas han propuesto que el mecanismo que subyace a dichas conductas es la empatía. Aunque varios autores apoyan dicha propuesta, existe evidencia inconsistente con el mecanismo empático. Por ejemplo, si se asume que la conducta de ayuda es motivada por la empatía, dicha conducta únicamente debería ejecutarse cuando sea necesaria (eliminar el distrés en otra rata). Sin embargo, recientemente se ha reportado que las ratas continúan realizando la conducta de ayuda incluso en situaciones en que dicho comportamiento no funciona. Se diseñó un experimento con ratas para evaluar si la cantidad de entrenamiento afecta la sensibilidad de la conducta de ayuda a la consecuencia (reducción del distrés). Se utilizó una tarea que implicó que una rata liberase a otra de un contenedor tubular. El Grupo Corto realizó dicha conducta durante pocas sesiones, mientras que el grupo Extenso ejecutó la conducta de ayuda por un periodo más largo. Finalmente, ambos grupos recibieron una prueba de generalización en la que el contenedor estuvo vacío. Los resultados mostraron que en las sesiones de prueba las ratas del Grupo Corto no abrieron el contenedor, mientras que el grupo Extenso sí lo abrió. Se discute el papel de los hábitos en la ejecución de conductas pro-sociales.

Bonobos voluntarily hand food to others but not toys or tools

A key feature of human prosociality is direct transfers, the most active form of sharing in which donors voluntarily hand over resources in their possession Direct transfers buffer hunter-gatherers against foraging shortfalls. The emergence and elaboration of this behaviour thus likely played a key role in human evolution by promoting cooperative interdependence and ensuring that humans' growing energetic needs (e.g. for increasing brain size) were more reliably met. According to the strong prosociality hypothesis, among great apes only humans exhibit sufficiently strong prosocial motivations to directly transfer food. The versatile prosociality hypothesis suggests instead that while other apes may make transfers in constrained settings, only humans share flexibly across food and non-food contexts. In controlled experiments, chimpanzees typically transfer objects but not food, supporting both hypotheses. In this paper, we show in two experiments that bonobos directly transfer food but not non-food items. These findings show that, in some contexts, bonobos exhibit a human-like motivation for direct food transfer. However, humans share across a far wider range of contexts, lending support to the versatile prosociality hypothesis. Our species' unusual prosocial flexibility is likely built on a prosocial foundation we share through common descent with the other apes.

The relation between bystanders' behavioral reactivity to distress and later helping behavior during a violent conflict in virtual reality

The occurrence of helping behavior is thought to be automatically triggered by reflexive reactions and promoted by intuitive decisions. Here, we studied whether reflexive reactions to an emergency situation are associated with later helping behavior in a different situation, a violent conflict. First, 29 male supporters of F.C. Barcelona performed a cued-reaction time task with a low and high cognitive load manipulation, to tap into reflexive and reflective processes respectively, during the observation of an emergency. Next, participants entered a bar in Virtual Reality and had a conversation with a virtual fellow supporter. During this conversation, a virtual Real Madrid supporter entered and started an aggressive argument with the fellow supporter that escalated into a physical fight. Verbal and physical interventions of the participant served as measures of helping behavior. Results showed that faster responses to an emergency situation during low, but not during high cognitive load, were associated with more interventions during the violent conflict. However, a tendency to describe the decision to act during the violent conflict as intuitive and reflex-like was related to more interventions. Further analyses revealed that a disposition to experience sympathy, other-oriented feelings during distressful situations, was related to self-reported intuitive decision-making, a reduced distance to the perpetrator, and higher in the intervening participants. Taken together, these results shed new light on helping behavior and are consistent with the notion of a motivational system in which the act of helping is dependent on a complex interplay between intuitive, reflexive and deliberate, reflective processes.

Chimpanzees spontaneously take turns in a shared serial ordering task

Social coordination can provide optimal solutions to many kinds of group dilemmas, and non-human subjects have been shown to perform single actions successively or simultaneously with partners to maximize food rewards in a variety of experimental settings. Less attention has been given to showing how animals are able to produce multiple (rather than single) intermixed and co-regulated actions, even though many species’ signal transmissions and social interactions rely on extended bouts of coordinated turn-taking. Here we report on coordination behaviour in three pairs of chimpanzees (mother/offspring dyads) during an experimentally induced turn-taking scenario. Participants were given a “shared” version of a computer-based serial ordering task that they had previously mastered individually. We found that minimal trial-and-error learning was necessary for the participants to solve the new social version of the task, and that information flow was more pronounced from mothers toward offspring than the reverse, mirroring characteristics of social learning in wild chimpanzees. Our experiment introduces a novel paradigm for studying behavioural coordination in non-humans, able to yield insights into the evolution of turn-taking which underlies a range of social interactions, including communication and language.

Convergent minds: ostension, inference and Grice's third clause

A prevailing view is that while human communication has an 'ostensive-inferential' or 'Gricean' intentional structure, animal communication does not. This would make the psychological states that support human and animal forms of communication fundamentally different. Against this view, I argue that there are grounds to expect ostensive communication in non-human clades. This is because it is sufficient for ostensive communication that one intentionally addresses one's utterance to one's intended interlocutor-something that is both a functional pre-requisite of successful communication and cognitively undemanding. Furthermore, while ostension is an important feature of intentional communication, the inferences required in Gricean communication may be minimal: ostension and inference may come apart. The grounds for holding that animal communication could not be Gricean are therefore weak. I finish by defending the idea that a 'minimally Gricean' model of communication is a valuable tool for characterizing the communicative interactions of many animal species.

Elephants know when their bodies are obstacles to success in a novel transfer task

The capacity to recognise oneself as separate from other individuals and objects is difficult to investigate in non-human animals. The hallmark empirical assessment, the mirror self-recognition test, focuses on an animal's ability to recognise itself in a mirror and success has thus far been demonstrated in only a small number of species with a keen interest in their own visual reflection. Adapting a recent study done with children, we designed a new body-awareness paradigm for testing an animal's understanding of its place in its environment. In this task, Asian elephants (Elephas maximus) were required to step onto a mat and pick up a stick attached to it by rope, and then pass the stick forward to an experimenter. In order to do the latter, the elephants had to see their body as an obstacle to success and first remove their weight from the mat before attempting to transfer the stick. The elephants got off the mat in the test significantly more often than in controls, where getting off the mat was unnecessary. This task helps level the playing field for non-visual species tested on cognition tasks and may help better define the continuum on which body- and self-awareness lie.

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.

Primate empathy: three factors and their combinations for empathy-related phenomena

Empathy as a research topic is receiving increasing attention, although there seems some confusion on the definition of empathy across different fields. Frans de Waal (de Waal FBM. Putting the altruism back into altruism: the evolution of empathy. Annu Rev Psychol 2008, 59:279-300. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093625) used empathy as an umbrella term and proposed a comprehensive model for the evolution of empathy with some of its basic elements in nonhuman animals. In de Waal's model, empathy consists of several layers distinguished by required cognitive levels; the perception-action mechanism plays the core role for connecting ourself and others. Then, human-like empathy such as perspective-taking develops in outer layers according to cognitive sophistication, leading to prosocial acts such as targeted helping. I agree that animals demonstrate many empathy-related phenomena; however, the species differences and the level of cognitive sophistication of the phenomena might be interpreted in another way than this simple linearly developing model. Our recent studies with chimpanzees showed that their perspective-taking ability does not necessarily lead to proactive helping behavior. Herein, as a springboard for further studies, I reorganize the empathy-related phenomena by proposing a combination model instead of the linear development model. This combination model is composed of three organizing factors: matching with others, understanding of others, and prosociality. With these three factors and their combinations, most empathy-related matters can be categorized and mapped to appropriate context; this may be a good first step to discuss the evolution of empathy in relation to the neural connections in human and nonhuman animal brains. I would like to propose further comparative studies, especially from the viewpoint of Homo-Pan (chimpanzee and bonobo) comparison. WIREs Cogn Sci 2017, 8:e1431. doi: 10.1002/wcs.1431 For further resources related to this article, please visit the WIREs website.

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.

One for You, One for Me

Long-term collaborative relationships require that any jointly produced resources be shared in mutually satisfactory ways. Prototypically, this sharing involves partners dividing up simultaneously available resources, but sometimes the collaboration makes a resource available to only one individual, and any sharing of resources must take place across repeated instances over time. Here, we show that beginning at 5 years of age, human children stabilize cooperation in such cases by taking turns across instances of obtaining a resource. In contrast, chimpanzees do not take turns in this way, and so their collaboration tends to disintegrate over time. Alternating turns in obtaining a collaboratively produced resource does not necessarily require a prosocial concern for the other, but rather requires only a strategic judgment that partners need incentives to continue collaborating. These results suggest that human beings are adapted for thinking strategically in ways that sustain long-term cooperative relationships and that are absent in their nearest primate relatives.

Investigating Empathy-Like Responding to Conspecifics' Distress in Pet Dogs

Empathy covers a wide range of phenomena varying according to the degree of cognitive complexity involved; ranging from emotional contagion, defined as the sharing of others' emotional states, to sympathetic concern requiring animals to have an appraisal of the others' situation and showing concern-like behaviors. While most studies have investigated how animals reacted in response to conspecifics' distress, dogs so far have mainly been targeted to examine cross-species empathic responses. To investigate whether dogs would respond with empathy-like behavior also to conspecifics, we adopted a playback method using conspecifics' vocalizations (whines) recorded during a distressful event as well as control sounds. Our subjects were first exposed to a playback phase where they were subjected either to a control sound, a familiar whine (from their familiar partner) or a stranger whine stimulus (from a stranger dog), and then a reunion phase where the familiar partner entered the room. When exposed to whines, dogs showed a higher behavioral alertness and exhibited more stress-related behaviors compared to when exposed to acoustically similar control sounds. Moreover, they demonstrated more comfort-offering behaviors toward their familiar partners following whine playbacks than after control stimuli. Furthermore, when looking at the first session, this comfort offering was biased towards the familiar partner when subjects were previously exposed to the familiar compared to the stranger whines. Finally, familiar whine stimuli tended to maintain higher cortisol levels while stranger whines did not. To our knowledge, these results are the first to suggest that dogs can experience and demonstrate "empathic-like" responses to conspecifics' distress-calls.