4.7 Article

Breaking conversational rules matters to captive gorillas: A playback experiment

Journal

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
Volume 10, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-63923-7

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. CIFRE grant - Association Beauval Nature pour la Conservation et la Recherche [2018_00074]
  2. Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique
  3. Rennes 1 University
  4. Lyon/Saint-Etienne University

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Across human cultures, conversations are regulated by temporal and social rules. The universality of conversational rules suggests possible biological bases and encourages comparisons with the communicative interactions of nonhuman animals. Unexpectedly, few studies have focused on other great apes despite evidence of proto-conversational rules in monkeys, thus preventing researchers from drawing conclusions on potential evolutionary origins of this behaviour. A previous study showed however that western lowland gorillas engage in soft call interactions that seem temporally- and socially-ruled. Indeed, interactions occurred mainly between individuals close in age who followed a preset response delay, thus preventing call overlap. Here, we experimentally investigated the presence of these rules in a captive gorilla group, using a violation-of-expectation paradigm. Head orientation responses suggest that the respect of response delay matters to subjects, but the importance of the interlocutors' age proximity appeared less clear. The intensity of the response varied with subjects' age in a context-dependent way, supporting a possible role of learning. Our findings support the growing number of studies highlighting the importance of vocal turn-taking in animals and a possible sociogenesis of this ability. The capacity to converse might have been a key step in the co-evolution of communication and complex sociality.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available