Dogs (Canis familiaris), but not chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes), understand imperative pointing.

Chimpanzees routinely follow the gaze of humans to outside targets. However, in most studies using object choice they fail to use communicative gestures (e.g. pointing) to find hidden food. Chimpanzees' failure to do this may be due to several difficulties with this paradigm. They may, for exam...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Katharina C Kirchhofer, Felizitas Zimmermann, Juliane Kaminski, Michael Tomasello
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2012
Materias:	Medicine R Science Q
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/800d88e901cf4d8e902ab7dd5a55fcd2
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:800d88e901cf4d8e902ab7dd5a55fcd2
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:800d88e901cf4d8e902ab7dd5a55fcd22021-11-18T07:28:41ZDogs (Canis familiaris), but not chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes), understand imperative pointing.1932-620310.1371/journal.pone.0030913https://doaj.org/article/800d88e901cf4d8e902ab7dd5a55fcd22012-01-01T00:00:00Zhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmid/22347411/?tool=EBIhttps://doaj.org/toc/1932-6203Chimpanzees routinely follow the gaze of humans to outside targets. However, in most studies using object choice they fail to use communicative gestures (e.g. pointing) to find hidden food. Chimpanzees' failure to do this may be due to several difficulties with this paradigm. They may, for example, misinterpret the gesture as referring to the opaque cup instead of the hidden food. Or perhaps they do not understand informative communicative intentions. In contrast, dogs seem to be skilful in using human communicative cues in the context of finding food, but as of yet there is not much data showing whether they also use pointing in the context of finding non-food objects. Here we directly compare chimpanzees' (N = 20) and dogs' (N = 32) skills in using a communicative gesture directed at a visible object out of reach of the human but within reach of the subject. Pairs of objects were placed in view of and behind the subjects. The task was to retrieve the object the experimenter wanted. To indicate which one she desired, the experimenter pointed imperatively to it and directly rewarded the subject for handing over the correct one. While dogs performed well on this task, chimpanzees failed to identify the referent. Implications for great apes' and dogs' understanding of human communicative intentions are discussed.Katharina C KirchhoferFelizitas ZimmermannJuliane KaminskiMichael TomaselloPublic Library of Science (PLoS)articleMedicineRScienceQENPLoS ONE, Vol 7, Iss 2, p e30913 (2012)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Medicine R Science Q
spellingShingle	Medicine R Science Q Katharina C Kirchhofer Felizitas Zimmermann Juliane Kaminski Michael Tomasello Dogs (Canis familiaris), but not chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes), understand imperative pointing.
description	Chimpanzees routinely follow the gaze of humans to outside targets. However, in most studies using object choice they fail to use communicative gestures (e.g. pointing) to find hidden food. Chimpanzees' failure to do this may be due to several difficulties with this paradigm. They may, for example, misinterpret the gesture as referring to the opaque cup instead of the hidden food. Or perhaps they do not understand informative communicative intentions. In contrast, dogs seem to be skilful in using human communicative cues in the context of finding food, but as of yet there is not much data showing whether they also use pointing in the context of finding non-food objects. Here we directly compare chimpanzees' (N = 20) and dogs' (N = 32) skills in using a communicative gesture directed at a visible object out of reach of the human but within reach of the subject. Pairs of objects were placed in view of and behind the subjects. The task was to retrieve the object the experimenter wanted. To indicate which one she desired, the experimenter pointed imperatively to it and directly rewarded the subject for handing over the correct one. While dogs performed well on this task, chimpanzees failed to identify the referent. Implications for great apes' and dogs' understanding of human communicative intentions are discussed.
format	article
author	Katharina C Kirchhofer Felizitas Zimmermann Juliane Kaminski Michael Tomasello
author_facet	Katharina C Kirchhofer Felizitas Zimmermann Juliane Kaminski Michael Tomasello
author_sort	Katharina C Kirchhofer
title	Dogs (Canis familiaris), but not chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes), understand imperative pointing.
title_short	Dogs (Canis familiaris), but not chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes), understand imperative pointing.
title_full	Dogs (Canis familiaris), but not chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes), understand imperative pointing.
title_fullStr	Dogs (Canis familiaris), but not chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes), understand imperative pointing.
title_full_unstemmed	Dogs (Canis familiaris), but not chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes), understand imperative pointing.
title_sort	dogs (canis familiaris), but not chimpanzees (pan troglodytes), understand imperative pointing.
publisher	Public Library of Science (PLoS)
publishDate	2012
url	https://doaj.org/article/800d88e901cf4d8e902ab7dd5a55fcd2
work_keys_str_mv	AT katharinackirchhofer dogscanisfamiliarisbutnotchimpanzeespantroglodytesunderstandimperativepointing AT felizitaszimmermann dogscanisfamiliarisbutnotchimpanzeespantroglodytesunderstandimperativepointing AT julianekaminski dogscanisfamiliarisbutnotchimpanzeespantroglodytesunderstandimperativepointing AT michaeltomasello dogscanisfamiliarisbutnotchimpanzeespantroglodytesunderstandimperativepointing
_version_	1718423420316680192

Dogs (Canis familiaris), but not chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes), understand imperative pointing.

Ejemplares similares