ReviewPhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2020
Spontaneous (minimal) ritual in non-human great apes?
Review in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- What we know and don't know about great ape cultural communication in the wild.American journal of primatology · 2025Review
- Review
- Ritual explained: interdisciplinary answers to Tinbergen's four questions.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2020Article
- The zone of latent solutions and its relevance to understanding ape cultures.Biology & philosophy · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The potential for rituals in non-human great apes (apes) is an understudied topic. We derive a minimal definition of ritual and then examine the currently available evidence for it in untrained and non-enculturated apes. First, we examine whether such apes show evidence for the two main components of our minimal definition of ritual: symbolism and copying. Second, we examine if there are actual cases already identifiable today that may fit all aspects of our minimal definition of ritual-or whether there are at least cases that fit some aspects (proto-ritual). We find that apes are not likely to spontaneously practise minimal ritual, but we claim that the highest expected likelihood of occurrence is in the results-copying domain. Yet, we did not find actual cases of minimal ritual in apes-including those involving environmental results. We did, however, find some cases that may match at least part of our minimal ritual definition-which we termed proto-ritual. At least two out of three potential cases of such proto-rituals that we identified (rain dance, object-in-ear and surplus nest-making procedures) do revolve around results. Overall, apes do not show much, or very clear, evidence for even minimal ritual, but may sometimes show proto-ritual. However, dedicated ape ritual studies are currently lacking, and future work may identify ape ritual (or clearer cases of proto-ritual). We discuss the implications of our preliminary finding for inferences of ritual in the last common ancestor of humans and apes. This article is part of the theme issue 'Ritual renaissance: new insights into the most human of behaviours'.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.