Testing three primate species' attentional biases toward preferred and unpreferred foods: Seeing red or high valued food?

Animals navigate complex environments that present both hazards and essential resources. The prioritization of perceptual information that is relevant to their next actions, such as accessing or avoiding different resources, poses a potential challenge to animals, one that can impact survival. While animals' attentional biases toward negatively valanced and threatening stimuli have been explored, parallel biases toward differently valued resources remain understudied. Here, we assessed whether three primate species (chimpanzees [Pan troglodytes], gorillas [Gorilla gorilla gorilla], and Japanese macaques [Macaca fuscata]) prioritized their attention to positively valued resources-preferred foods compared to unpreferred foods. We employed a computerized dot probe attentional bias task in which we presented participants with paired images of their preferred and unpreferred foods in randomized locations (left or right). Latencies to touch the "probe" that replaced either image revealed that all three species responded faster to the probe when it replaced the preferred option (χ²(1) = 284.50, SE² = .03, p < .001). The uniformity of the primates' responses hints that a propensity to prioritize highly preferred items is rooted in these primates' evolutionary past, one that may serve as a mechanism to rapidly detect and locate resources such as highly valued foods. Future research will help disentangle the role that color plays in these biases. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Familiarity mediates apes' attentional biases toward human faces.

In zoos, primates experience markedly different interactions with familiar humans, such as the zookeepers who care for them, compared with those with unfamiliar humans, such as the large volume of zoo visitors to whom they are regularly exposed. While the behaviour of zoo-housed primates in the presence of unfamiliar, and to a lesser extent familiar, humans has received considerable attention, if and how they spontaneously distinguish familiar from unfamiliar people, and the cognitive mechanisms underlying the relationships they form with familiar and unfamiliar humans, remain poorly understood. Using a dot-probe paradigm, we assessed whether primates (chimpanzees and gorillas) show an attentional bias toward the faces of familiar humans, with whom the apes presumably had a positive relationship. Contrary to our predictions, all subjects showed a significant attentional bias toward unfamiliar people's faces compared with familiar people's faces when the faces showed a neutral expression, both with and without a surgical face mask on, but no significant attentional bias when the faces showed a surprised expression. These results demonstrate that apes can spontaneously categorize humans based on familiarity and we argue that the attentional biases the apes showed for unfamiliar human faces reflect a novelty effect.

A Comparative Perspective on Three Primate Species' Responses to a Pictorial Emotional Stroop Task.

The Stroop effect describes interference in cognitive processing due to competing cognitive demands. Presenting emotionally laden stimuli creates similar Stroop-like effects that result from participants' attention being drawn to distractor stimuli. Here, we adapted the methods of a pictorial Stroop study for use with chimpanzees (N = 6), gorillas (N = 7), and Japanese macaques (N = 6). We tested all subjects via touchscreens following the same protocol. Ten of the 19 subjects passed pre-test training. Subjects who reached criterion were then tested on a standard color-interference Stroop test, which revealed differential accuracy in the primates' responses across conditions. Next, to test for an emotional Stroop effect, we presented subjects with photographs that were either positively valenced (a preferred food) or negatively valenced (snakes). In the emotional Stroop task, as predicted, the primates were less accurate in trials which presented emotionally laden stimuli as compared to control trials, but there were differences in the apes' and monkeys' response patterns. Furthermore, for both Stroop tests, while we found that subjects' accuracy rates were reduced by test stimuli, in contrast to previous research, we found no difference across trial types in the subjects' response latencies across conditions.

A review of research in primate sanctuaries.

While non-human primate studies have long been conducted in laboratories, and more recently at zoological parks, sanctuaries are increasingly considered a viable setting for research. Accredited sanctuaries in non-range countries house thousands of primates formerly used as subjects of medical research, trained performers or personal pets. In range countries, however, sanctuaries typically house orphaned primates confiscated from illegal poaching and the bushmeat and pet trafficking trades. Although the primary mission of these sanctuaries is to rescue and rehabilitate residents, many of these organizations are increasingly willing to participate in non-invasive research. Notably, from a scientific standpoint, most sanctuaries provide potential advantages over traditional settings, such as large, naturalistic physical and social environments which may result in more relevant models of primates' free-ranging wild counterparts than other captive settings. As a result, an impressive scope of research in the fields of primate behaviour, cognition, veterinary science, genetics and physiology have been studied in sanctuaries. In this review, we examine the range and form of research that has been conducted at accredited sanctuaries around the world. We also describe the potential challenges of sanctuary-based work and the considerations that external researchers may face when deciding to collaborate with primate sanctuaries on their research projects.