4.2 Article

Complexity in Object Manipulation by Japanese Macaques (Macaca fuscata): A Cross-Sectional Analysis of Manual Coordination in Stone Handling Patterns

期刊

JOURNAL OF COMPARATIVE PSYCHOLOGY
卷 125, 期 1, 页码 61-71

出版社

AMER PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.1037/a0020868

关键词

bimanuality; manual role differentiation; aging-related motor dysfunction; object play; tool-use

资金

  1. Ministry of Education, Science, Sports and Culture, Japan [1907421]
  2. Lavoisier postdoctoral Grant
  3. Ministere des Affaires Etrangeres, France
  4. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS) [07421]
  5. HOPE Project

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Defined as a spontaneous stone-directed noninstrumental manipulative behavior, and comprised of multiple one-handed and (a)symmetrical/(un)coordinated two-handed patterns, stone handling (SH) is a good candidate for the study of complexity in object manipulation. We present a cross-sectional developmental analysis of SH complexity in Japanese macaques (Macaca fuscata), through the combined investigation of bimanuality, coordination, and symmetry in hand use. Bimanual SH patterns were more frequent than unimanual patterns. Among bimanual patterns, coordinated actions were more frequent than uncoordinated ones. We recorded five asymmetrical coordinated SH patterns with manual role differentiation, a form of hand use reminiscent of complex actions involving the use of tools in monkeys and apes. Bimanuality in SH was affected by body posture. Aging individuals performed less bimanual and less coordinated SH patterns than younger individuals. Our result on senescent males performing less bimanual patterns than senescent females was consistent with sex differences found in the late deterioration of complex manual movements in other species. Although some SH patterns represent a high degree of behavioral complexity, our results suggest that SH behavior is not as complex as tool-use or tool-manufacture in other nonhuman primates and hominids.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据