ArticlePrimates; journal of primatology2024
May the force be with you: exploring force discrimination in chimpanzees using the force-feedback device.
Article in Primates; journal of primatology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- I've just seen a face: further search for face pareidolia in chimpanzees (Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
While force-feedback devices have been developed in areas such as virtual reality, there have been very few comparative cognitive studies in nonhuman animals using these devices. In addition, although cross-modal perception between vision and touch has been actively studied in nonhuman primates for several decades, there have been no studies of their active haptic perception. In this study, we attempted to train force discrimination in chimpanzees using a force-feedback device modified from a trackball. Chimpanzees were given different levels of force feedback (8.0 vs. 0.5 N) when moving the on-screen cursor to the target area by manipulating the trackball and were required to select one of two choice stimuli based on the force cue. The experiment was conducted using a trial-block procedure in which the same force stimulus was presented for a fixed number of trials, and the force stimulus was changed between blocks. The block size was progressively reduced from ten trials. Four chimpanzees were trained, but none reached the learning criterion (80% or more correct responses under the condition that the force stimuli were presented randomly). However, a detailed analysis of the chimpanzees' performance before and after the trial-block switching revealed that their choice behavior could not be explained by a simple win-stay/lose-shift strategy, suggesting that the switching of the force stimuli affected the chimpanzees' choice behavior. It was also found that the chimpanzees performed better when switching from small to large force stimuli than when switching from large to small force stimuli. Although none of the chimpanzees in this study acquired force discrimination, future studies using such force-feedback devices will provide new insights for understanding haptic cognition in nonhuman primates from a comparative cognitive perspective.
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.