Choosing and using tools: capuchins (Cebus apella) use a different metric than tamarins (Saguinus oedipus).

Cotton-top tamarins (Saguinus oedipus) selected canes positioned so that a straight inward pull brought food within reach (M. D. Hauser, 1997; see also record 1997-41347-003). Tamarins failed to retrieve food with canes in other positions, and they did not reposition these canes. In this study, tufted capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) preferred canes they could pull straight in when these were present, but they also repositioned canes in individually variable ways, and their success at obtaining food with repositioned canes improved with practice. In accord with predictions drawn from ecological psychology, capuchins discovered affordances of canes through exploratory actions with these objects, whereas tamarins did not. Ecological theory predicts these differences on the basis of species-typical manipulative activity, and it provides a useful approach for the study of species differences in tool-using behavior.

Relational spatial reasoning by a nonhuman: the example of capuchin monkeys.

The authors review spontaneous manipulation and spatial problem solving by capuchin monkeys to illuminate the nature of relational reasoning (wherein two or more elements of a problem or situation are considered together to arrive at a course of action) that these monkeys use in goal-directed activity. Capuchin monkeys master problems with one, two, or three spatial relations, and if more than one relation, at least two relations may be managed concurrently. They can master static and dynamic relations and, with sufficient practice, can produce specific spatial relations through both direct and distal action. Examining capuchins' spatial problem-solving behavior with objects in the framework of a spatial relational reasoning model leads to new interpretations of previous studies with these monkeys and other nonhuman animals. The model produces a variety of testable predictions concerning the contribution of relational properties to spatial reasoning. It also provides conceptual linkages with neurological processes and cognitive analyses of physical reasoning. Understanding relational spatial reasoning, including tool use, in a wider view is vital to informed, principled comparison of problem solving and the use of technology across species, across ages within species, and across eras in human prehistory.