Factors influencing deceptive behaviours in Tonkean macaques (Macaca tonkeana)
In: BehaviourbUniversité de Strasbourg — Laboratoire de Neurosciences Cognitives et Adaptatives, 12 rue Goethe, 67000 Strasbourg, France
cCNRS — Laboratoire de Neurosciences Cognitives et Adaptatives, UMR 7364, 12 rue Goethe, 67000 Strasbourg, France
dUniversity of Strasbourg Institute for Advanced Study, 5 allée du Général Rouvillois, 67083 Strasbourg, France
eUniversity of Zürich, Anthropological Institute and Museum, Winterthurerstrasse 190, CH-8057 Zürich, Switzerland
Search for other papers by Charlotte Canteloup in
Current site
Google Scholar
Search for other papers by Isis Poitrasson in
Current site
Google Scholar
Search for other papers by James R. Anderson in
Current site
Google Scholar
Search for other papers by Nicolas Poulin in
Current site
Google Scholar
bUniversité de Strasbourg — Laboratoire de Neurosciences Cognitives et Adaptatives, 12 rue Goethe, 67000 Strasbourg, France
cCNRS — Laboratoire de Neurosciences Cognitives et Adaptatives, UMR 7364, 12 rue Goethe, 67000 Strasbourg, France
dUniversity of Strasbourg Institute for Advanced Study, 5 allée du Général Rouvillois, 67083 Strasbourg, France
Search for other papers by Hélène Meunier in
Current site
Google Scholar
The complex social environments of primates create opportunities for engaging in tactical deception, especially for subordinate individuals. We analysed the behaviour of subordinate Tonkean macaques with dominant conspecifics in an experimental food competition context. The subordinate macaque could see two pieces of food in a test area, but only one piece was visible to the dominant. Both individuals were released into the test area at the same time or with the subordinate given a short head start on the dominant. Here, based on video analysis of the subordinates’ behaviours, we describe and classify functionally deceptive behaviours displayed by subordinates, and report factors that influenced these behaviours. Subordinates used several types of tactical deception, including concealment and distraction, especially when paired with competitors of much higher social rank, and they obtained the hidden food more frequently when they used a combination of tactics rather than only one.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
-
Anderson J.R., Kuroshima H., Kuwahata H., Fujita K., Vick S.J. (2001). Training squirrel monkeys (Saimiri sciureus) to deceive: acquisition and analysis of behavior toward cooperative and competitive trainers. — J. Comp. Psychol. 15: 282-293.
-
Bates D., Maechler M., Bolker B., Walker S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. — J. Stat. Softw. 67: 1-48.
-
Bräuer J., Call J., Tomasello M. (2007). Chimpanzees really know what others can see in a competitive situation. — Anim. Cogn. 10: 439-448.
-
Byrne R.W. (2003). Tracing the evolutionary path of cognition. — In: The social brain: evolution and pathology ( Brüne M., Ribbert H., Schiefenhövel W., eds). Wiley, Chichester, p. 43-60.
-
Byrne R.W., Whiten A. (1985). Tactical deception of familiar individuals in baboons (Papio ursinus). — Anim. Behav. 33: 669-673.
-
Byrne R.W., Whiten A. (1988). Machiavellian intelligence: social expertise and the evolution of intellect in monkeys, apes and humans. — Oxford University Press, Oxford.
-
Byrne R.W., Whiten A. (1990). Tactical deception in primates: the 1990 database. — Primate Rep. 27: 1-101.
-
Byrne R.W., Whiten A. (1992). Cognitive evolution in primates: evidence from tactical deception. — Man, New Series 27: 609-627.
-
Call J., Tomasello M. (2008). Does the chimpanzee have a theory of mind? 30 years later. — Trends Cogn. Sci. 12: 187-192.
-
Canteloup C., Meunier H. (2017). ‘Unwilling’ versus ‘unable’: Tonkean macaques’ understanding of human goal-directed actions. — PeerJ. 5: e3227.
-
Canteloup C., Bovet D., Meunier H. (2015a). Do Tonkean macaques (Macaca tonkeana) tailor their gestural and visual signals to fit the attentional states of a human partner? — Anim. Cogn. 18: 451-461.
-
Canteloup C., Bovet D., Meunier H. (2015b). Intentional gestural communication and discrimination of human attentional states in rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta). — Anim. Cogn. 18: 875-883.
-
Canteloup C., Piraux E., Poulin N., Meunier H. (2016). Do Tonkean macaques (Macaca tonkeana) perceive what conspecifics do and do not see? — PeerJ. 4: e1693.
-
Coussi-Korbel S. (1994). Learning to outwit a competitor in mangabeys (Cercocebus torquatus torquatus). — J. Comp. Psychol. 108: 164-171.
-
Dawkins R., Krebs J.R. (1978). Animal signals: information or manipulation? — In: Behavioral ecology: an evolutionary approach ( Krebs J.R., Davies N.B., eds). Blackwell, Oxford, p. 282-309.
-
de Vries H. (1995). An improved test of linearity in dominance hierarchies containing unknown or tied relationships. — Anim. Behav. 50: 1375-1389.
-
de Vries H., Netto W.J., Hanegraaf P.L.H. (1993). Matman: a program for the analysis of sociometric matrices and behavioural transition matrices. — Behaviour. 125: 157-175.
-
de Waal F.B.M. (1992). Intentional deception in primates. — Evol. Anthropol. 1: 86-92.
-
Dennett D.C. (1988). The intentional stance in theory and practice. — In: Machiavellian intelligence: social expertise and the evolution of intellect in monkeys, apes and humans ( Byrne R.W., Whiten A., eds). Clarendon Press, Oxford, p. 180-202.
-
Ducoing A.M., Thierry B. (2003). Withholding information in semifree-ranging Tonkean macaques (Macaca tonkeana). — J. Comp. Psychol. 117: 67-75.
-
Ducoing A.M., Thierry B. (2004). Following and joining the informed individual in semifree-ranging Tonkean macaques (Macaca tonkeana). — J. Comp. Psychol. 118: 413-420.
-
Flombaum J.I., Santos L.R. (2005). Rhesus monkeys attribute perceptions to others. — Curr. Biol. 15: 447-452.
-
Fujita K., Kuroshima H., Masuda T. (2002). Do tufted capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) spontaneously deceive opponents? A preliminary analysis of an experimental food-competition contest between monkeys. — Anim. Cogn. 5: 19-25.
-
Genty E., Roeder J.J. (2006). Can lemurs learn to deceive? A study in the black lemur (Eulemur macaco). — J. Exp. Psychol. Anim. Behav. Process. 32: 196-200.
-
Genty E., Foltz J., Roeder J.J. (2008). Can brown lemurs (Eulemur fulvus) learn to deceive a human competitor? — Anim. Cogn. 11: 255-266.
-
Hall K., Oram M.W., Campbell M.W., Eppley T.M., Byrne R.W., de Waal F. (2016). Chimpanzee uses manipulative gaze cues to conceal and reveal information to foraging competitor. — Am. J. Primatol. 79: 1-11.
-
Hall K., Brosnan S.F. (2016). Cooperation and deception in primates. — Infant Behav. Dev., in press. DOI:10.1016/j.infbeh.2016.11.007.
-
Hare B. (2001). Can competitive paradigms increase the validity of experiments on primate social cognition? — Anim. Cogn. 4: 269-280.
-
Hare B., Tomasello M. (2004). Chimpanzees are more skillful in competitive than in cooperative cognitive tasks. — Anim. Behav. 68: 571-581.
-
Hare B., Call J., Agnetta B., Tomasello M. (2000). Chimpanzees know what conspecifics do and do not see. — Anim. Behav. 59: 771-785.
-
Hare B., Call J., Tomasello M. (2001). Do chimpanzees know what conspecifics know? — Anim. Behav. 61: 139-151.
-
Held S., Mendl M., Laughlin K., Byrne R.W. (2002). Cognition studies with pigs: livestock cognition and its implication for production. — J. Anim. Sci. 80: E10-E17.
-
Hirata S., Matsuzawa T. (2001). Tactics to obtain a hidden food item in chimpanzee pairs (Pan troglodytes). — Anim. Cogn. 4: 285-295.
-
Johnson C.M., Karin-D’Arcy M.R. (2006). Social attention in nonhuman primates: a behavioral review. — Aquat. Mamm. 32: 423-442.
-
Krebs J.R., Dawkins R. (1984). Animal signals: mind reading and manipulation. — In: Behavioral ecology: an evolutionary approach, 2nd edn. ( Krebs J.R., Davies N.B., eds). Blackwell, Oxford, p. 380-401.
-
le Roux A., Snyder-Mackler N., Roberts E.K., Beehner J.C., Bergman T.J. (2013). Evidence for tactical concealment in a wild primate. — Nature Commun. 4: 1462.
-
Menzel E.W. (1971). Communication about the environment in a group of young chimpanzees. — Folia Primatol. 15: 220-232.
-
Menzel E.W. (1974). A group of young chimpanzees in a one-acre field. — In: Behavior of nonhuman primates. Modern research trends, Vol. 5 ( Schrier A.M., Stollnitz F., eds). Academic Press, New York, NY, p. 83-149.
-
Mitchell R.W. (1986). A framework for discussing deception. — In: Deception: perspectives on human and nonhuman deceit ( Mitchell R.W., Thompson N.S., eds). State University of New York Press, Albany, NY, p. 3-40.
-
Mitchell R.W., Anderson J.R. (1997). Pointing, withholding information, and deception in capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella). — J. Comp. Psychol. 111: 351-361.
-
Overduin-de Vries A.M., Spruijt B.M., Sterck E.H.M. (2014). Long-tailed macaques (Macaca fascicularis) understand what conspecifics can see in a competitive situation. — Anim. Cogn. 17: 77-84.
-
Overduin-de Vries A.M., Spruijt B.M., de Vries H., Sterck E.H.M. (2015). Tactical deception to hide sexual behaviour: macaques use distance, not visibility. — Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 69: 1333-1342.
-
Povinelli D.J., Vonk J. (2003). Chimpanzee minds: suspiciously human? — Trends Cogn. Sci. 7: 157-160.
-
Ristau C.A. (1991). Aspects of the cognitive ethology of an injury-feigning bird, the piping plover. — In: Cognitive ethology: the minds of other animals ( Ristau C.A., ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, p. 91-126.
-
Rochat J., Serra E., Fadiga L., Gallese V. (2008). The evolution of social cognition: goal familiarity shapes monkeys’ action understanding. — Curr. Biol. 18: 227-232.
-
Santos L.R., Nissen A.G., Ferrugia J.A. (2006). Rhesus monkeys, Macaca mulatta, know what others can and cannot hear. — Anim. Behav. 71: 1175-1181.
-
Wood J.N., Glynn D.D., Phillips B.C., Hauser M.D. (2007). The perception of rational, goal-directed action in nonhuman primates. — Science 317: 1402-1405.
-
Woodruff G., Premack D. (1979). Intentional communication in the chimpanzee: the development of deception. — Cognition 7: 333-362.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 1408 | 124 | 14 |
| Full Text Views | 490 | 13 | 0 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 296 | 22 | 0 |
Factors influencing deceptive behaviours in Tonkean macaques (Macaca tonkeana)
In: BehaviourbUniversité de Strasbourg — Laboratoire de Neurosciences Cognitives et Adaptatives, 12 rue Goethe, 67000 Strasbourg, France
cCNRS — Laboratoire de Neurosciences Cognitives et Adaptatives, UMR 7364, 12 rue Goethe, 67000 Strasbourg, France
dUniversity of Strasbourg Institute for Advanced Study, 5 allée du Général Rouvillois, 67083 Strasbourg, France
eUniversity of Zürich, Anthropological Institute and Museum, Winterthurerstrasse 190, CH-8057 Zürich, Switzerland
Search for other papers by Charlotte Canteloup in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Isis Poitrasson in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by James R. Anderson in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Nicolas Poulin in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
bUniversité de Strasbourg — Laboratoire de Neurosciences Cognitives et Adaptatives, 12 rue Goethe, 67000 Strasbourg, France
cCNRS — Laboratoire de Neurosciences Cognitives et Adaptatives, UMR 7364, 12 rue Goethe, 67000 Strasbourg, France
dUniversity of Strasbourg Institute for Advanced Study, 5 allée du Général Rouvillois, 67083 Strasbourg, France
Search for other papers by Hélène Meunier in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
The complex social environments of primates create opportunities for engaging in tactical deception, especially for subordinate individuals. We analysed the behaviour of subordinate Tonkean macaques with dominant conspecifics in an experimental food competition context. The subordinate macaque could see two pieces of food in a test area, but only one piece was visible to the dominant. Both individuals were released into the test area at the same time or with the subordinate given a short head start on the dominant. Here, based on video analysis of the subordinates’ behaviours, we describe and classify functionally deceptive behaviours displayed by subordinates, and report factors that influenced these behaviours. Subordinates used several types of tactical deception, including concealment and distraction, especially when paired with competitors of much higher social rank, and they obtained the hidden food more frequently when they used a combination of tactics rather than only one.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 1408 | 124 | 14 |
| Full Text Views | 490 | 13 | 0 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 296 | 22 | 0 |
