TY - JOUR
T1 - Sensitivity to relational similarity and object similarity in apes and children
AU - Christie, Stella
AU - Gentner, Dedre
AU - Call, Josep
AU - Haun, Daniel Benjamin Moritz
N1 - Funding Information:
This research was supported by NSF SLC grant SBE-0541957 awarded to the Spatial Intelligence and Learning Center (SILC), the Max Planck Society , and Swarthmore Lang Sabbatical Fellowship . We thank Ed Wasserman and anonymous reviewers for comments; S.C. thanks Bartłomiej Czech.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2016 Elsevier Ltd.
PY - 2016/2/22
Y1 - 2016/2/22
N2 - Relational reasoning is a hallmark of sophisticated cognition in humans [1, 2]. Does it exist in other primates? Despite some affirmative answers [3-11], there appears to be a wide gap in relational ability between humans and other primates - even other apes [1, 2]. Here, we test one possible explanation for this gap, motivated by developmental research showing that young humans often fail at relational reasoning tasks because they focus on objects instead of relations [12-14]. When asked, "duck:duckling is like tiger:?," preschool children choose another duckling (object match) rather than a cub. If other apes share this focus on concrete objects, it could undermine their relational reasoning in similar ways. To test this, we compared great apes and 3-year-old humans' relational reasoning on the same spatial mapping task, with and without competing object matches. Without competing object matches, both children and Pan species (chimpanzees and bonobos) spontaneously used relational similarity, albeit children more so. But when object matches were present, only children responded strongly to them. We conclude that the relational gap is not due to great apes' preference for concrete objects. In fact, young humans show greater object focus than nonhuman apes.
AB - Relational reasoning is a hallmark of sophisticated cognition in humans [1, 2]. Does it exist in other primates? Despite some affirmative answers [3-11], there appears to be a wide gap in relational ability between humans and other primates - even other apes [1, 2]. Here, we test one possible explanation for this gap, motivated by developmental research showing that young humans often fail at relational reasoning tasks because they focus on objects instead of relations [12-14]. When asked, "duck:duckling is like tiger:?," preschool children choose another duckling (object match) rather than a cub. If other apes share this focus on concrete objects, it could undermine their relational reasoning in similar ways. To test this, we compared great apes and 3-year-old humans' relational reasoning on the same spatial mapping task, with and without competing object matches. Without competing object matches, both children and Pan species (chimpanzees and bonobos) spontaneously used relational similarity, albeit children more so. But when object matches were present, only children responded strongly to them. We conclude that the relational gap is not due to great apes' preference for concrete objects. In fact, young humans show greater object focus than nonhuman apes.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84959569978&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84959569978&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.cub.2015.12.054
DO - 10.1016/j.cub.2015.12.054
M3 - Article
C2 - 26853364
AN - SCOPUS:84959569978
VL - 26
SP - 531
EP - 535
JO - Current Biology
JF - Current Biology
SN - 0960-9822
IS - 4
ER -