Yamamoto

Question 1

Altruistically

Answer 1

willingness to do certain things for others, even if it disadvantages you

Question 2

shared intentionality

Answer 2

the ability and motivation to engage with others in collaborative activities with joint goals.

Question 3

empirical evidence

Answer 3

information that can be acquired through observation and tested using experimental methods

Question 4

flexible targeted helping

Answer 4

where you make a choice of how to help the other person achieve a goal
- help and care based on the cognitive appreciation of the need or situation of others

Question 5

conspecifics

Answer 5

members of the same specie

Question 6

background of Yamamoto (3 points)

Answer 6

• humans show altruistic behaviour
• animals rarely help spontaneously, but at direct request of others. The ability to offer targeted help is linked to TOM
• previous studies show little about the cognitive mechanism underlying the helping behaviour to non-human animals, no study has empirically examined if and how chimps understand others goals

Question 7

Aims of Yamamoto

Answer 7

To learn more about helping behaviour in chimpanzees. Specifically, to find out whether chimpanzees:

• have the ability and flexibility to UNDERSTAND the needs of conspecifics
• can RESPOND to those needs with targeted helping
• can help conspecifics without being asked

Question 8

IV

Answer 8

‘can see’, helper can see the other’s tool-use situation

‘cannot see’

Question 9

DV

Answer 9

percentage of voluntary offer & upon request offer

Question 10

How did they operationalise ‘targeted helping’

Answer 10

operationalised by letting the chimps choose the correct tools to help their conspecifics

Question 11

How did they operationalise ‘offer’

Answer 11

as the chimps holding out a tool towards the recipient

Question 12

How did they operationalise ‘request’

Answer 12

as the recipient poking their arm through the hole

Question 13

Outline the 7 steps of procedure

Answer 13

1. familiarisation phase
2. can see booth
3. cannot see booth
4. can see booth x2
5. 48 trials, 24 stick-use, 24 straw-use
6. trials ended when the recipient received the object and succeeded in obtaining the juice reward, OR after 5 mins elapsed without an object being passed
7. offers were counted when the chimpanzee held out the object to recipient, whether the recipient took it or not. Only the 1st offer was counted, subsequent offers of different items were not included

Question 14

Describe the familiarisation phase

Answer 14

8 days, 5 mins. They went through this phase each day before the trials started, they could examine and manipulate all the objects without the need to use them as tools or offer them to others

Question 15

Describe the ‘can see’ booth

Answer 15

panel between the two chimps was transparent

Question 16

What do the chimps need to do? And what is the apparatus?

Answer 16

A chimpanzee had to select a tool that would help the other chimpanzee to solve a problem. One task requires a stick and the other required a straw, solving = juice to recipient.

7 objects in a booth occupied by the ‘helper’, could not be reached by recipient but can be requested (poking arm through a hole), this allowed us to examine whether ‘helper’ understands what the other needed

Question 17

Describe the cannot see booth

Answer 17

panel between the two chimps was opaque

Question 18

Why did they repeat the ‘can see’ booth?

Answer 18

Repeated to confirm that any difference in the object choice between the first two conditions was due to intentional, targeted helping and not a order effect

Question 19

What is the sample used?

Answer 19

• 5 chimps, mother and child pair
• housed at Prime Research Institute in Japan
• were chosen because they were experts in the two tool-use tasks used in the study

Question 20

What is the weakness of the sample?

Answer 20

• 1 chimps did not participate, less data

- lacks generalisability, as they are better than other chimps

Question 21

Is there any surprising finding?

Answer 21

• All chimps, except Pan, first offered potential tools significantly more frequently
• Ayumu peaks through the hole when selecting tools in cannot see condition, so offered the correct tools

Question 22

What are the findings?

Answer 22

• More frequently offered a stick in a stick-use situation and vice versa
• In cannot see, no significant difference in the choice of tool in relation to the tool-use situation
• The results in the 2nd ‘can see’ is consistent with the 1st
• chimps show flexible targeted helping when they could visually assess the situation

Question 23

Biggest difference noted between the “can see” and “cannot see” condition

Answer 23

no difference in choice of stick or straw when stick or straw was needed.
- This suggests that the chimpanzees can only understand their partner’s needs when they can see the task themselves.

Question 24

What is the main conclusion? (empirical evidence)

Answer 24

Empirical evidence
- It provides empirical evidence for chimp’s flexible, targeted helping, based on an understanding of others’ goals. When helpers could visually access their partner;s situation, they selected out of 7 tools an appropriate tool to transfer to their partner so he/she can obtain a reward.

Question 25

What is the main conclusion? (cognitive mechanism)

Answer 25

Offers insights into the cognitive mechanism underlying helping behaviour in chimps --> chimps are motivated to help upon request even they cannot properly assess the others' predicament

Question 26

What is the main conclusion? (voluntary help)

Answer 26

Even when they understand the needs, they seldom help others unless directly requested. Both understanding of others' goals + detection of directed request are essential for targeted helping in chimps

Question 27

What are the ethical guidelines in animal research?

Answer 27

- replacement - specie and strain - number of animals - procedures: pain and distress - housing - reward, deprivation and aversive stimuli

Question 28

What is Bateson's cube

Answer 28

- animal suffering - likelihood of benefit - importance/quality of research

Question 29

Give two strengths of the study

Answer 29

- carried in a lab, high reliability | - minimised extraneous variables, high internal validity

Question 30

Give two weaknesses of the study

Answer 30

- biased sample, low generalisability | - artificial environment, low ecological validity.

Question 31

Statistical results in can see condition

Answer 31

Any offer: 91% | Upon request: 90%

Question 32

Statistical results in cannot see

Answer 32

Any offer:96% | Upon request: 72%

Question 33

Statistical results in second can see

Answer 33

Any offer: 98% | Upon request: 79%

Question 34

What did previous study failed to examine?

Answer 34

- previous studies failed to examine whether chimps actually understood what others needed, because they never confronted with a behavioural choice when given the opportunity to help

Question 35

What are the differences between Savage-Rumbaugh and this study?

Answer 35

- chimps had to request using symbols, requires training, too artificial, also did not give insight into helping behaviour.