A comparative study of causal perception in Guinea baboons (Papio papio) and human adults

• Published in: PloS one Vol. 19; no. 12; p. e0311294
• Main Authors: Meewis, Floor, Barezzi, Iris, Fagot, Joël, Claidière, Nicolas, Dautriche, Isabelle
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Public Library of Science 12.12.2024; Public Library of Science (PLoS)
• Subjects: Adult; Adults; Analysis; Animal cognition; Animals; Attentional bias; Baboons; Biology and life sciences; Causal inference; Causality; Cognitive science; Comparative studies; Diseases; Evolution; Female; Genetic aspects; Growth; Health aspects; Humans; Male; Monkeys & apes; Papio papio; Papio papio - physiology; People and Places; Social Sciences; Spatial discrimination learning; Visual Perception - physiology; Young Adult; France
• ISSN: 1932-6203; 1932-6203
• DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0311294

In humans, simple 2D visual displays of launching events (“Michottean launches”) can evoke the impression of causality. Direct launching events are regarded as causal, but similar events with a temporal and/or spatial gap between the movements of the two objects, as non-causal. This ability to distinguish between causal and non-causal events is perceptual in nature and develops early and preverbally in infancy. In the present study we investigated the evolutionary origins of this phenomenon and tested whether Guinea baboons ( Papio papio ) perceive causality in launching events. We used a novel paradigm which was designed to distinguish between the use of causality and the use of spatiotemporal properties. Our results indicate that Guinea baboons successfully discriminate between different Michottean events, but we did not find a learning advantage for a categorisation based on causality as was the case for human adults. Our results imply that, contrary to humans, baboons focused on the spatial and temporal gaps to achieve accurate categorisation, but not on causality per se . Understanding how animals perceive causality is important to figure out whether non-human animals comprehend events similarly to humans. Our study hints at a different manner of processing physical causality for Guinea baboons and human adults.