Observed behavior can be the result of complex cognitive processes that are influenced by environmental factors, physiological process, and situational features. Pressure, a feature of a situation in which an individual’s outcome is impacted by his or her own ability to perform, has been traditionally treated as a human-specific phenomenon and only recently have pressure-related deficits been considered in relation to other species. However, there are strong similarities in biological and cognitive systems among mammals (and beyond), and high-pressure situations are at least theoretically common in the wild. We hypothesize that other species are sensitive to pressure and that we can learn about the evolutionary trajectory of pressure responses by manipulating pressure experimentally in these other species. Recent literature indicates that, as in humans, pressure influences responses in non-human primates, with either deficits in ability to perform (“choking”) or an ability to thrive when the stakes are high. Here, we synthesize the work to date on performance under pressure in humans and how hormones might be related to individual differences in responses. Then, we discuss why we would expect to see similar effects of pressure in non-humans and highlight the existing evidence for how other species respond. We argue that evidence suggests that other species respond to high-pressure contexts in similar ways as humans, and that responses to pressure are a critical missing piece of our understanding of cognition in human and non-human animals. Understanding pressure’s effects could provide insight into individual variation in decision-making in comparative cognition and the evolution of human decision-making.
This content will become publicly available on December 1, 2023
- NSF-PAR ID:
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Scientific Reports
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
A goal of the comparative approach is to test a variety of species on the same task. Here, we examined whether the factors that helped capuchin monkeys improve their performance in a dichotomous choice task would generalize to three other primate species: orangutans, gorillas, and drill monkeys. In this task, subjects have access to two options, each resulting in an identical food, but one (the ephemeral option) is only available if it is chosen first, whereas the other one (the permanent option) is always available. Therefore, the food‐maximizing solution is to choose the ephemeral option first, followed by the permanent option for an additional reward. On the original version (plate task), the options were discriminated by the color and pattern of the plates holding the food, while on two subsequent versions we used altered cues that we predicted would improve performance: (1) the color of the foods themselves (color task), which we hypothesized was relevant to primates, who choose foods rather than substrates on which foods are found when foraging, and (2) patterned cups covering the foods (cup task), which we hypothesized would help primates avoid the prepotent response associated with visible food. Like capuchins, all three species initially failed to solve the plate task. However, while orangutans improved their performance from the plate to the color task, they did not for the cup task, and only a few gorillas and no drills succeeded in either task. Unfortunately, our ability to interpret these data was obscured by differences in the subjects' level of experience with cognitive testing and practical constraints that precluded the use of completely identical procedures across species. Nonetheless, we consider what these results can tell us, and discuss the value of conducting studies across multiple sites despite unavoidable differences.
Language and culture endow humans with access to conceptual information that far exceeds any which could be accessed by a non‐human animal. Yet, it is possible that, even without language or specific experiences, non‐human animals represent and infer some aspects of similarity relations between objects in the same way as humans. Here, we show that monkeys’ discrimination sensitivity when identifying images of animals is predicted by established measures of semantic similarity derived from human conceptual judgments. We used metrics from computer vision and computational neuroscience to show that monkeys’ and humans’ performance cannot be explained by low‐level visual similarity alone. The results demonstrate that at least some of the underlying structure of object representations in humans is shared with non‐human primates, at an abstract level that extends beyond low‐level visual similarity. Because the monkeys had no experience with the objects we tested, the results suggest that monkeys and humans share a primitive representation of object similarity that is independent of formal knowledge and cultural experience, and likely derived from common evolutionary constraints on object representation.
Numerous animal species currently experience habitat loss and fragmentation. This might result in behavioral and dietary adjustments, especially because fruit availability is frequently reduced in fragments. Food scarcity can result in elevated physiological stress levels, and chronic stress often has detrimental effects on individuals. Some animal species exhibit a high degree of fission–fusion dynamics, and theory predicts that these species reduce intragroup feeding competition by modifying their subgroup size according to resource availability. Until now, however, there have been few studies on how species with such fission–fission dynamics adjust their grouping patterns and social behavior in small fragments or on how food availability influences their stress levels. We collected data on fruit availability, feeding behavior, stress hormone levels (measured through fecal glucocorticoid metabolites (FGCM)), subgroup size, and aggression for two groups of brown spider monkeys (
Ateles hybridus) in a small forest fragment in Colombia and examined whether fruit availability influences these variables. Contrary to our predictions, spider monkeys ranged in smaller subgroups, had higher FGCM levels and higher aggression rates when fruit availability was high compared to when it was low. The atypical grouping pattern of the study groups seems to be less effective at mitigating contest competition over food resources than more typical fission–fusion patterns. Overall, our findings illustrate that the relationship between resource availability, grouping patterns, aggression rates, and stress levels can be more complex than assumed thus far. Additional studies are needed to investigate the long‐term consequences on the health and persistence of spider monkeys in fragmented habitats. Am. J. Primatol. 76:1049–1061, 2014. © 2014 The Authors. American Journal of PrimatologyPublished by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Objective: To determine if a vestibular prosthesis could improve function in subjects with severe vestibular damage and could be used it as a scientific tool to investigate central vestibular processing. Background: Damage to the vestibular labyrinth is common and usually permanent. We therefore developed and tested a vestibular implant (VI) that is designed to mimic the information normally provided by the vestibular labyrinth to determine if we can reduce vestibular-mediated deficits and study temporal integration of sensory cues in the brain. Design/Methods: Monkeys had electrodes implanted in the semicircular canals of one ear and then severe bilateral vestibular damage was induced with aminoglycosides. Eye movements, perception, and balance were tested before and after vestibular damage and with the VI activated, which supplied head motion information to the brain via electrical stimulation delivered by the implanted electrodes. Humans also had electrode implantation (done in conjunction with a cochlear implant, CI) and they were tested on a temporal binding psychophysical task Results: Stimulation provided by VI in vestibulopathic monkeys improved their balance, perception of spatial orientation, and eye movement responses. Timing experiments in humans using CI and VI stimuli showed that unlike past experiments that used motion to generate the vestibular signal, CI and VI signals were received by the cerebral cortex with the same latency and were perceived as simultaneous, but this timing perception was highly sensitive to adaption. Conclusions: VI improves oculomotor, postural, and perceptual behavior in vestibulopathic monkeys and could prove to be an effective way to improve these functions in patients with permanent labyrinthine damage. Timing experiments show that when novel stimuli are used, the brain synthesizes them in accordance with their arrival at the cortex, but that experience can rapidly recalibrate this timing relationship, which may be why normal stimuli that are experienced habitually lack this characteristic.more » « less