Communication and Language

doi:10.1017/9781108564113.002

Part I - Communication and Language

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 July 2021

Edited by

Allison B. Kaufman ,

Josep Call and

James C. Kaufman

Show author details

Allison B. Kaufman: Affiliation:
University of Connecticut
Josep Call: Affiliation:
University of St Andrews, Scotland
James C. Kaufman: Affiliation:
University of Connecticut

Book contents

Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'

Type: Chapter
Information: The Cambridge Handbook of Animal Cognition , pp. 3 - 114

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108564113.002 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Acquistapace, P., Aquiloni, L., Hazlett, B. A., & Gherardi, F. (2002). Multimodal communication in crayfish: Sex recognition during mate search by male Austropotamobius pallipes. Canadian Journal of Zoology, 80(11), 2041–2045.Google Scholar

Arnold, K. & Zuberbühler, K. (2012). Call combinations in monkeys: Compositional or idiomatic expressions? Brain and Language, 120(3), 303–309.Google Scholar

Arriaga, G., Zhou, E. P., & Jarvis, E. D. (2012). Of mice, birds, and men: The mouse ultrasonic song system has some features similar to humans and song-learning birds. PLoS One, 7(10), e46610.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Aureli, F. & Schaffner, C. M. (2002) Relationship assessment through emotional mediation. Behaviour, 139: 393–420.Google Scholar

Bard, K. A., Dunbar, S., Maguire‐Herring, V., Veira, Y., Hayes, K. G., & McDonald, K. (2014). Gestures and social‐emotional communicative development in chimpanzee infants. American Journal of Primatology, 76(1), 14–29.Google Scholar

Bolhuis, J. J., Beckers, G. J., Huybregts, M. A., Berwick, R. C., & Everaert, M. B. (2018). Meaningful syntactic structure in songbird vocalizations? PLoS Biology, 16(6), e2005157.Google Scholar

Bradbury, J. W. & Vehrencamp, S. L. (1998). Principles of Animal Communication. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates.Google Scholar

Brosnan, S. F. & De Waal, F. B. (2002). A proximate perspective on reciprocal altruism. Human Nature, 13(1), 129–152.Google Scholar

Byrne, R. W., Cartmill, E., Genty, E., Graham, K. E., Hobaiter, C., & Tanner, J. (2017). Great ape gestures: Intentional communication with a rich set of innate signals. Animal Cognition, 20(4), 755–769.Google Scholar

Call, J. & Tomasello, M. (2007). The Gestural Communication of Apes and Monkeys. Hillsdale, MI: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar

Cartmill, E. A. & Byrne, R. W. (2007). Orangutans modify their gestural signaling according to their audience’s comprehension. Current Biology, 17(15), 1345–1348.Google Scholar

Chow, C. P., Mitchell, J. F., & Miller, C. T. (2015). Vocal turn-taking in a non-human primate is learned during ontogeny. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 282(1807), 20150069.Google Scholar

Christiansen, M. H. & Chater, N. (2016). The now-or-never bottleneck: A fundamental constraint on language. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 39, E62. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X1500031XGoogle Scholar

Clark, C. J. (2009). Courtship dives of Anna’s hummingbird offer insights into flight performance limits. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 276(1670), 3047–3052.Google Scholar

Crockford, C., Wittig, R. M., Mundry, R., & Zuberbühler, K. (2012). Wild chimpanzees inform ignorant group members of danger. Current Biology, 22(2), 142–146.Google Scholar

Crockford, C., Herbinger, I., Vigilant, L., & Boesch, C. (2004). Wild chimpanzees produce group-specific calls: A case for vocal learning? Ethology, 110, 221–243. 110. doi: 10.1111/j.1439-0310.2004.00968.xGoogle Scholar

Crockford, C, Wittig, R. M., Langergraber, K., Ziegler, T. E., Zuberbühler, K., et al. (2013) Urinary oxytocin and social bonding in related and unrelated wild chimpanzees. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 280( 1755), 20122765Google Scholar

Danchin, E., Giraldeau, L. A., Valone, T. J., & Wagner, R. H. (2004). Public information: From nosy neighbors to cultural evolution. Science, 305(5683), 487–491.Google Scholar

Darst, C. R., Cummings, M. E., & Cannatella, D. C. (2006). A mechanism for diversity in warning signals: Conspicuousness versus toxicity in poison frogs. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 103(15), 5852–5857.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Darwin, C. (1871). The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Dawkins, R. & Krebs, J. R. (1978). Animal Signals: Information or Manipulation. In Krebs, J. R. & Davies, N. B. (Eds.), Behavioural Ecology: An Evolutionary Approach (pp. 282–309). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Dawkins, R. & Krebs, J. R. (1979). Arms races between and within species. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 205(1161), 489–511.Google Scholar

Dehaene, S. & Cohen, L. (2011). The unique role of the visual word form area in reading. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15(6), 254–262.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Demartsev, V., Strandburg-Peshkin, A., Ruffner, M., & Manser, M. (2018). Vocal turn-taking in meerkat group calling sessions. Current Biology, 28(22), 3661–3666.Google Scholar

El-Hani, C. N., Queiroz, J., & Stjernfelt, F. (2010). Firefly femmes fatales: A case study in the semiotics of deception. Biosemiotics, 3(1), 33–55.Google Scholar

Engesser, S., Ridley, A. R., & Townsend, S. W. (2016). Meaningful call combinations and compositional processing in the southern pied babbler. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(21), 5976–5981.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Evans, C. S. & Evans, L. (1999). Chicken food calls are functionally referential. Animal Behaviour, 58(2), 307–319.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Fröhlich, M., Kuchenbuch, P., Müller, G., Fruth, B., Furuichi, T., Wittig, R. M., & Pika, S. (2016). Unpeeling the layers of language: Bonobos and chimpanzees engage in cooperative turn-taking sequences. Scientific Reports, 6(1), 1–14.Google Scholar

von Frisch, K. (1967). The Dance Language and Orientation of Bees. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Fröhlich, M., Müller, G., Zeiträg, C., Wittig, R. M., & Pika, S. (2017). Gestural development of chimpanzees in the wild: The impact of interactional experience. Animal Behaviour, 134, 271–282.Google Scholar

Fröhlich, M., Sievers, C., Townsend, S. W., Gruber, T., & van Schaik, C. P. (2019). Multimodal communication and language origins: Integrating gestures and vocalizations. Biological Reviews, 94(5), 1809–1829.Google Scholar

Garrod, S. & Pickering, M. J. (2004). Why is conversation so easy? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(1), 8–11.Google Scholar

Genty, E., Breuer, T., Hobaiter, C., & Byrne, R. W. (2009). Gestural communication of the gorilla (Gorilla gorilla): Repertoire, intentionality and possible origins. Animal Cognition, 12(3), 527–546.Google Scholar

Girard, M. B., Kasumovic, M. M., & Elias, D. O. (2011). Multi-modal courtship in the peacock spider, Maratus volans (OP-Cambridge, 1874). PLoS One, 6(9), e25390.Google Scholar

Grafen, A. (1990). Biological signals as handicaps. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 144(4), 517–546.Google Scholar

Graham, K. E., Furuichi, T., & Byrne, R. W. (2017). The gestural repertoire of the wild bonobo (Pan paniscus): A mutually understood communication system. Animal Cognition, 20(2), 171–177.Google Scholar

Guilford, T. & Dawkins, M. S. (1991). Receiver psychology and the evolution of animal signals. Animal Behaviour, 42(1), 1–14.Google Scholar

Halina, M., Rossano, F., & Tomasello, M. (2013). The ontogenetic ritualization of bonobo gestures. Animal Cognition, 16(4), 653–666.Google Scholar

Hammerschmidt, K., Reisinger, E., Westekemper, K., Ehrenreich, L., Strenzke, N. and Fischer, J. (2012). Mice do not require auditory input for the normal development of their ultrasonic vocalizations. BMC Neuroscience, 13(1), 40.Google Scholar

Henry, L., Craig, A. J. F. K., Lemasson, A., & Hausberger, M. (2016). Social Coordination in Animal Vocal Interactions. Is There any Evidence of Turn-Taking? The Starling as an Animal Model. In Holler, J., Casillas, M., & Levinson, S. C. (Eds.), Turn-Taking in Human Communicative Interaction. Lausanne: Frontiers Media SA.Google Scholar

Higham, J. P. & Hebets, E. A. (2013). An introduction to multimodal communication. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 67(9), 1381–1388.Google Scholar

Hobaiter, C. & Byrne, R. W. (2011a). Serial gesturing by wild chimpanzees: Its nature and function for communication. Animal Cognition, 14(6), 827–838.Google Scholar

Hobaiter, C. & Byrne, R. W. (2011b). The gestural repertoire of the wild chimpanzee. Animal Cognition, 14(5), 745–767.Google Scholar

Hobaiter, C. & Byrne, R. W. (2014). The meanings of chimpanzee gestures. Current Biology, 24(14), 1596–1600.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Hockett, C. F. (1960). The origin of speech. Scientific American, 203(3), 88–97.Google Scholar

Huxley, J. S. (1914) The courtship habits of the great crested grebe (Podiceps cristatus): With an addition to the theory of sexual selection. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London, 35, 491–562.CrossRef Google Scholar

Isack, H. A. & Reyer, H. U. (1989). Honeyguides and honey gatherers: interspecific communication in a symbiotic relationship. Science, 243(4896), 1343–1346.Google Scholar

Janik, V. M. & Slater, P. J. (2000). The different roles of social learning in vocal communication. Animal Behaviour, 60(1), 1–11.Google Scholar

Johnstone, R. A. (1997). The Evolution of Animal Signals. In Krebs, J. R. & Davies, N. B. (Eds.), Behavioural Ecology: An Evolutionary Approach, 155–178. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Kaufhold, S. P. & Rossano, F. (2020). Proximate mechanisms and relational history: The interdependence of food transfers in socially housed orang-utans (Pongo abelii). Animal Behaviour, 167, 243–253.Google Scholar

Kays, R., Crofoot, M. C., Jetz, W., & Wikelski, M. (2015). Terrestrial animal tracking as an eye on life and planet. Science, 348(6240), aaa2478.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Kendon, A. (2004). Gesture: Visible Action as Utterance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Laidre, M. E. & Johnstone, R. A. (2013). Animal signals. Current Biology, 23(18), R829–R833.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Lameira, A. R. (2017). Bidding evidence for primate vocal learning and the cultural substrates for speech evolution. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 83, 429–439.Google Scholar

Lattenkamp, E. Z. & Vernes, S. C. (2018). Vocal learning: A language-relevant trait in need of a broad cross-species approach. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 21, 209–215.Google Scholar

Leavens, D. A., Hostetter, A. B., Wesley, M. J., & Hopkins, W. D. (2004). Tactical use of unimodal and bimodal communication by chimpanzees, Pan troglodytes. Animal Behaviour, 67, 467–476.CrossRef Google Scholar

Leavens, D. A., Russell, J. L., & Hopkins, W. D. (2010). Multimodal communication by captive chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). Animal Cognition, 13(1), 33–40.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Lemasson, A., Glas, L., Barbu, S., Lacroix, A., Guilloux, M., Remeuf, K., & Koda, H. (2011). Youngsters do not pay attention to conversational rules: Is this so for nonhuman primates? Scientific Reports 1, 22(2011), https://doi.org/10.1038/srep00022 Google Scholar

Levinson, S. C. (2016). Turn-taking in human communication–origins and implications for language processing. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20(1), 6–14.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Liebal, K., Call, J., & Tomasello, M. (2004a). Use of gesture sequences in chimpanzees. American Journal of Primatology, 64(4), 377–396.Google Scholar

Liebal, K., Call, J., Tomasello, M., & Pika, S. (2004b). To move or not to move: How apes adjust to the attentional state of others. Interaction Studies, 5(2), 199–219.CrossRef Google Scholar

Liebal, K., Schneider, C., & Errson-Lembeck, M. (2019). How primates acquire their gestures: Evaluating current theories and evidence. Animal Cognition, 22(4), 473–486.Google Scholar

Lloyd, J. E. (1983). Bioluminescence and communication in insects. Annual Review of Entomology, 28(1), 131–160.Google Scholar

Lorenz, K. (1941). Kant’s Lehre vom Apriorischen im Lichte gegenwärtiger Biologie. Blätter für Deutsche Philosophie, 15, 94–125.Google Scholar

Lorenz, K. Z. (1966). Evolution of ritualization in the biological and cultural spheres. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, 251(772), 273–284.Google Scholar

Lorenz, K. (1973). Die Rückseite des Spiegels. Munich: Piper.Google Scholar

Marler, P. (1961). The logical analysis of animal communication. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 1, 295–317.Google Scholar

Marler, P. (1965). Communication in Monkeys and Apes. In DeVore, I. & Hall, K. R. L. (Eds.), Primate Behavior (pp. 544–586). New York: Holt Rinehardt & Winston.Google Scholar

Martins, P. T. & Boeckx, C. (2020). Vocal learning: Beyond the continuum. PLoS Biology, 18(3), e3000672.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Maynard Smith, W. J. (1977). The Behavior of Communicating. Harvard, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

McLennan, D. A. (2003). The importance of olfactory signals in the gasterosteid mating system: Sticklebacks go multimodal. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 80(4), 555–572.CrossRef Google Scholar

Mitchell, R. W. (1986). A Framework for Discussing Deception. In Mitchell, R. W. & Thompson, N. S. (Eds.), Deception: Perspectives on Human and Nonhuman Deceit (pp. 3–40). Albany: State University of New York.Google Scholar

Morris, D. (1957). “Typical intensity” and its relation to the problem of ritualisation. Behaviour, 11(1), 1–12.Google Scholar

Ouattara, K., Lemasson, A., & Zuberbühler, K. (2009). Campbell’s monkeys concatenate vocalizations into context-specific call sequences. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106(51), 22026–22031.Google Scholar

Owings, D. H. & Morton, E. S. 1997. The Role of Information in Communication: An Assessment/Management Approach. In Owings, D. H., Beecher, M. D., & Thompson, N. S. (Eds.). Perspectives in Ethology: Vol. 12, Communication, (pp. 359–390). Boston: Springer.Google Scholar

Owings, D. H. & Morton, E. S. 1998. Animal Vocal Communication: A New Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Owren, M. J., Rendall, D., & Ryan, M. J. (2010). Redefining animal signaling: Influence versus information in communication. Biology & Philosophy, 25(5), 755–780.CrossRef Google Scholar

Partan, S. & Marler, P. (1999). Communication goes multimodal. Science, 283(5406), 1272–1273.Google Scholar

Partan, S. R. & Marler, P. (2005). Issues in the classification of multimodal communication signals. American Naturalist, 166(2), 231–245.Google Scholar

Pearce, J. M. & Bouton, M. E. (2001). Theories of associative learning in animals. Annual Review of Psychology, 52(1), 111–139.Google Scholar

Petkov, C. I. & Jarvis, E. (2012). Birds, primates, and spoken language origins: Behavioral phenotypes and neurobiological substrates. Frontiers in Evolutionary Neuroscience, 4, 12.Google Scholar

Pika, S., Wilkinson, R., Kendrick, K. H., & Vernes, S. C. (2018). Taking turns: Bridging the gap between human and animal communication. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 285(1880), 20180598.Google Scholar

Potvin, D. A., Ratnayake, C. P., Radford, A. N., & Magrath, R. D. (2018). Birds learn socially to recognize heterospecific alarm calls by acoustic association. Current Biology, 28(16), 2632–2637.Google Scholar

Rendall, D., Owren, M. J., & Ryan, M. J. (2009). What do animal signals mean? Animal Behaviour, 78(2), 233–240.CrossRef Google Scholar

Rossano, F. (2013). Sequence organization and timing of bonobo mother-infant interactions. Interaction Studies, 14(2), 160–189.Google Scholar

Rossano, F. (2018). Social manipulation, turn-taking and cooperation in apes Implications. Interaction Studies, 19, 1–2.Google Scholar

Rossano, F. (2019). The Structure and Timing of Human versus Primate Social Interaction. In Hagoort, P. (Ed.), Human Language: From Genes and Brains to Behavior (pp. 201–219). Cambridge: MIT Press.CrossRef Google Scholar

Russon, A. E. & Galdikas, B. M. (1993). Imitation in free-ranging rehabilitant orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 107(2), 147–161.Google Scholar

Russon, A. E. & Galdikas, B. M. (1995). Constraints on great apes’ imitation: Model and action selectivity in rehabilitant orangutan (Pongo pygmaeus) imitation. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 109(1), 5.Google Scholar

Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50, 696–735.Google Scholar

Santos, J. C., Coloma, L. A., & Cannatella, D. C. (2003). Multiple, recurring origins of aposematism and diet specialization in poison frogs. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 100(22), 12792–12797.Google Scholar

Schaefer, H. M. & Ruxton, G. D. (2011). Plant–Animal Communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Schel, A. M., Townsend, S. W., Machanda, Z., Zuberbühler, K., & Slocombe, K. E. (2013). Chimpanzee alarm call production meets key criteria for intentionality. PLoS One, 8(10), e76674.Google Scholar

Schino, G. & Aureli, F. (2009) Reciprocal altruism in primates: Partner choice, cognition, and emotions. Advanced Study of Behavior, 39, 45–69. pmid:20862268CrossRef Google Scholar

Schino, G. & Aureli, F. (2010). Primate reciprocity and its cognitive requirements. Evolutionary Anthropology: Issues, News, and Reviews, 19(4), 130–135.Google Scholar

Schneider, C., Call, J., & Liebal, K. (2012). What role do mothers play in the gestural acquisition of bonobos (Pan paniscus) and chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes)? International Journal of Primatology, 33(1), 246–262.CrossRef Google Scholar

Searcy, W. A. & Nowicki, S. (2005). The Evolution of Animal Communication: Reliability and Deception in Signaling Systems. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Seyfarth, R. M., Cheney, D. L., & Marler, P. (1980). Monkey responses to three different alarm calls: Evidence of predator classification and semantic communication. Science, 210(4471), 801–803.Google Scholar

Seyfarth, R. M. & Cheney, D. L. (2003). Signalers and receivers in animal communication. Annual Review of Psychology, 54(1), 145–173.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Seyfarth, R. M. & Cheney, D. L. (2010). Production, usage, and comprehension in animal vocalizations. Brain and Language, 115(1), 92–100Google Scholar

Seyfarth, R. M. & Cheney, D. L. (2017). The origin of meaning in animal signals. Animal Behaviour, 124, 339–346.Google Scholar

Shannon, C. E. & Weaver, W. (1949). The Mathematical Theory of Communication. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar

Silk, J. B., Kaldor, E., & Boyd, R. (2000). Cheap talk when interests conflict. Animal Behaviour, 59(2), 423–432.Google Scholar

Slobodchikoff, C. N., Kiriazis, J., Fischer, C., & Creef, E. (1991). Semantic information distinguishing individual predators in the alarm calls of Gunnison’s prairie dogs. Animal Behaviour, 42(5), 713–719.Google Scholar

Slobodchikoff, C. N., Perla, B. S., & Verdolin, J. L. (2009). Prairie Dogs: Communication and Community in an Animal Society. Harvard, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRef Google Scholar

Slocombe, K. E. & Zuberbühler, K. (2005). Functionally referential communication in a chimpanzee. Current Biology, 15(19), 1779–1784.Google Scholar

Slocombe, K. E., Waller, B. M., & Liebal, K. (2011). The language void: The need for multimodality in primate communication research. Animal Behaviour, 81(5), 919–924.Google Scholar

Smith, M. J. & Harper, D. G. (1995). Animal signals: Models and terminology. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 177(3), 305–311.Google Scholar

Spottiswoode, C. N., Begg, K. S., & Begg, C. M. (2016). Reciprocal signaling in honeyguide-human mutualism. Science, 353(6297), 387–389.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Stegmann, U. E. (2005). John Maynard Smith’s notion of animal signals. Biology and Philosophy, 20(5), 1011–1025.Google Scholar

Stevens, M. & Ruxton, G. D. (2011). Linking the evolution and form of warning coloration in nature. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 279(1728), 417–426, rspb20111932.Google Scholar

Stivers, T., Enfield, N. J., Brown, P., Englert, C., Hayashi, M., Heinemann, T., … & Levinson, S. C. (2009). Universals and cultural variation in turn-taking in conversation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106(26), 10587–10592.Google Scholar

Suzuki, T. N., Wheatcroft, D., & Griesser, M. (2016). Experimental evidence for compositional syntax in bird calls. Nature Communications, 7(1), 1–7.Google Scholar

Takahasi, M. & Okanoya, K. (2010). Song learning in wild and domesticated strains of white‐rumped munia, lonchura striata, compared by cross‐fostering procedures: Domestication increases song variability by decreasing strain‐specific bias. Ethology, 116(5), 396–405.Google Scholar

Takahashi, D. Y., Fenley, A. R., & Ghazanfar, A. A. (2016). Early development of turn-taking with parents shapes vocal acoustics in infant marmoset monkeys. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 371(1693), 20150370.Google Scholar

Tanner, J. E., Patterson, F. G., & Byrne, R. W. (2006) The development of spontaneous gestures in zoo-living gorillas and sign-taught gorillas: From action and location to object representation. Journal of Development Processes, 1, 69–102Google Scholar

Tennie, C., Call, J., & Tomasello, M. (2006). Push or pull: Imitation vs. emulation in great apes and human children. Ethology, 112(12), 1159–1169.CrossRef Google Scholar

Tinbergen, N. (1952). “Derived” activities: Their causation, biological significance, origin, and emancipation during evolution. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 27(1), 1–32.Google Scholar

Tinbergen, N. (1963). On aims and methods of ethology. Zeitschrift für tierpsychologie, 20(4), 410–433.Google Scholar

Tomasello, M., Call, J., Nagell, C., Olguin, R., & Carpenter, M. (1994) The learning and use of gestural signals by young chimpanzees: A trans-generational study. Primates 35, 137–154Google Scholar

Tomasello, M., Call, J., Warren, J., Frost, G. T., Carpenter, M., & Nagell, K. (1997). The ontogeny of chimpanzee gestural signals: A comparison across groups and generations. Evolution of Communication, 1(2), 223–259.Google Scholar

Tomasello, M. & Zuberbühler, K. (2002). Primate Vocal and Gestural Communication. In Bekoff, M., Allen, C., & Burghardt, G. M. (Eds.), The Cognitive Animal (pp. 293–299). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Townsend, S. W., Engesser, S., Stoll, S., Zuberbühler, K., & Bickel, B. (2018). Compositionality in animals and humans. PLoS Biology, 16(8), e2006425.Google Scholar

Uetz, G. W., Roberts, J. A., & Taylor, P. W. (2009). Multimodal communication and mate choice in wolf spiders: Female response to multimodal versus unimodal signals. Animal Behaviour, 78(B2), 299–305.Google Scholar

de Waal, F. B. M. (2000). Attitudinal reciprocity in food sharing among brown capuchin monkeys. Animal Behaviour, 60(2), 253–261.Google Scholar

Wallis, J. (1992). Chimpanzee genital swelling and its role in the pattern of sociosexual behavior. American Journal of Primatology, 28(2), 101–113.Google Scholar

Watson, S. K., Townsend, S. W., Schel, A. M., Wilke, C., Wallace, E. K., Cheng, L., West, V., & Slocombe, K. E. (2015). Vocal learning in the functionally referential food grunts of chimpanzees. Current Biology, 25(4), 495–499.Google Scholar

Wheeler, B. C. & Fischer, J. (2012). Functionally referential signals: A promising paradigm whose time has passed. Evolutionary Anthropology: Issues, News, and Reviews, 21(5), 195–205.Google Scholar

Wiener, N. (1948). Cybernetics or Control and Communication in the Animal and the Machine. Technology Press. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar

Wirthlin, M., Chang, E. F., Knörnschild, M., Krubitzer, L. A., et al. (2019). A modular approach to vocal learning: Disentangling the diversity of a complex behavioral trait. Neuron, 104(1), 87–99.Google Scholar

Zahavi, A. (1975). Mate selection – A selection for a handicap. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 53(1), 205–214.Google Scholar

Zuberbühler, K. (2000a). Referential labelling in Diana monkeys. Animal Behaviour, 59(5), 917–927.Google Scholar

Zuberbühler, K. (2000b). Interspecies semantic communication in two forest primates. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 267(1444), 713–718.Google Scholar

References

Ache, B. W. & Young, J. M. (2005). Olfaction: Diverse species, conserved principles. Neuron, 48(3), 417–430. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2005.10.022 Google Scholar

Agbogba, C. (1991). Observations sur les signaux préparatoires à l’alimentation des larves chez la fourmi ponérine Pachycondyla caffraria (Smith). Insectes Sociaux, 38(4), 439–442. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01241877 Google Scholar

Agosti, D. & Johnson, N. F. (Eds.) (2005). Antbase. World Wide Web electronic publication. antbase.org, version (05/2005).Google Scholar

Andel, D. & Wehner, R. (2004). Path integration in desert ants, Cataglyphis: How to make a homing ant run away from home. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 271(1547), 1485–1489. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2004.2749 Google Scholar

Ayasse, M., Paxton, R. J., & Tengö, J. (2001). Mating behaviour and chemical communication in the order Hymenoptera. Ecological Research, 46(1), 31–78. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1420510 Google Scholar

Banks, A. N. & Srygley, R. B. (2003). Orientation by magnetic field in leaf-cutter ants, Atta colombica (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Ethology, 109(10), 835–846. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0179-1613.2003.00927.x Google Scholar

Billen, J. & Šobotník, J. (2015). Insect exocrine glands. Arthropod Structure and Development, 44(5), 399–400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asd.2015.08.010 Google Scholar

Blum, M. S. (1985). Alarm Pheromone in Comparative Insect Physiology, Biochemistry and Pharmacology. In Kerkut, G. A. & Gilbert, L. I. (Eds.), Alarm Pheromone (Comparativ, pp. 193–224). Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar

Bosmia, A. N., Griessenauer, C. J., Haddad, V., & Shane Tubbs, R. (2015). Ritualistic envenomation by bullet ants among the Sateré-Mawé Indians in the Brazilian Amazon. Wilderness and Environmental Medicine, 26(2), 271–273. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wem.2014.09.003 Google Scholar

Boulay, R., Hefetz, A., Soroker, V., & Lenoir, A. (2000). Camponotus fellah colony integration: Worker individuality necessitates frequent hydrocarbon exchanges. Animal Behaviour, 59(6), 1127–1133. https://doi.org/10.1006/anbe.2000.1408 Google Scholar

Bourke, A. F. & Franks, N. R. (1995). Social Evolution in Ants. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Bradbury, J. & Vehrencamp, S. (1998). Principles of Animal Communication. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates.Google Scholar

Branstetter, M. G., Danforth, B. N., Pitts, J. P., Faircloth, B. C., Ward, P. S., Buffington, M. L., … Brady, S. G. (2017). Phylogenomic insights into the evolution of stinging wasps and the origins of ants and bees. Current Biology, 27(7), 1019–1025. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2017.03.027 Google Scholar

Brunner, E. & Heinze, J. (2009). Worker dominance and policing in the ant Temnothorax unifasciatus. Insectes Sociaux, 56(4), 397–404. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00040–009-0037-x Google Scholar

Butenandt, A., Beckmann, R., Stamm, D., & Hecker, E. (1959). Über den Sexual-Lockstoff des Seidensspinners Bombyx mori. Naturforsch., 14(b), 283–284.Google Scholar

Carter, G. G. & Wilkinson, G. S. (2013). Food sharing in vampire bats: Reciprocal help predicts donations more than relatedness or harassment. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 280(1753). https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2012.2573 Google Scholar PubMed

Creemers, B., Billen, J., & Gobin, B. (2003). Larval begging behaviour in the ant Myrmica rubra. Ethology Ecology and Evolution, 15(3), 261–272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tet.2011.12.053 Google Scholar

David, M. E. (2009). Trail pheromones of ants. Physiological Entomology, 34(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3032.2008.00658.x Google Scholar

Dearborn, D. C. (1998). Begging behavior and food acquisition by brown-headed cowbird nestlings. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 43(4–5), 259–270. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002650050490 Google Scholar

Denis, D., Chameron, S., Costille, L., Pocheville, A., Châline, N., & Fresneau, D. (2008). Workers agonistic interactions in queenright and queenless nests of a polydomous ant society. Animal Behaviour, 75(3), 791–800. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2007.06.016 Google Scholar

di Mauro, G., Perez, M., Lorenzi, M. C., Guerrieri, F. J., Millar, J. G., & d’Ettorre, P. (2015). Ants discriminate between different hydrocarbon concentrations. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution, 3(November), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fevo.2015.00133 Google Scholar

Dorigo, M. & Gambardella, L. M. (1997). Ant colonies for the travelling salesman problem. Bio Systems, 43(2), 73–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0303-2647(97)01708-5 Google Scholar

d’Ettorre, P. (2016). Genomic and brain expansion provide ants with refined sense of smell. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(49), 13947–13949. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1617405113 Google Scholar

d’Ettorre, P. & Heinze, J. (2005). Individual recognition in ant queens. Current Biology, 15(23), 2170–2174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2005.10.067 Google Scholar

Ferreira, R. S., Cros, E., Fresneau, D., & Rybak, F. (2014). Behavioural contexts of sound production in Pachycondyla ants (Formicidae: Ponerinae). Acta Acustica United with Acustica, 100(4), 739–747. https://doi.org/10.3813/AAA.918753 Google Scholar

Franks, N. R. & Richardson, T. (2006). Teaching in tandem-running ants. Nature, 439(7073), 153. https://doi.org/10.1038/439153a Google Scholar

von Frisch, K. (1974). Decoding the language of the bee. Science, 185(4152), 663–668. Retrieved from www.jstor.org/stable/1738718 Google Scholar

Gibbs, A. (1998). Water-proofing properties of cuticular lipids. American Psychologist, 38, 471–482. https://doi.org/https://www.jstor.org/stable/4620168 Google Scholar

Giurfa, M. & Sandoz, J.-C. (2012). Invertebrate learning and memory: Fifty years of olfactory conditioning of the proboscis extension response in honeybees. Learning & Memory, 19(2), 54–66. https://doi.org/10.1101/lm.024711.111 Google Scholar

Golden, T. M. J. & Hill, P. S. M. (2016). The evolution of stridulatory communication in ants, revisited. Insectes Sociaux, 63(2), 309–319. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00040-016-0470-6 Google Scholar

Goss, S., Aron, S., Deneubourg, J. L., & Pasteels, J. M. (1989). Self-organized shortcuts in the Argentine ant. Naturwissenschaften, 76(12), 579–581. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00462870 Google Scholar

Greenberg, L., Tröger, A. G., Francke, W., McElfresh, J. S., Topoff, H., Aliabadi, A., & Millar, J. G. (2007). Queen sex pheromone of the slave-making ant, Polyergus breviceps. Journal of Chemical Ecology, 33(5), 935–945. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10886-007-9269-2 Google Scholar

Guerrieri, F. J. & d’Ettorre, P. (2008). The mandible opening response: Quantifying aggression elicited by chemical cues in ants. Journal of Experimental Biology, 211(7), 1109–1113. https://doi.org/10.1242/jeb.008508 Google Scholar

Guerrieri, F. J. & d’Ettorre, P. (2010). Associative learning in ants: Conditioning of the maxilla-labium extension response in Camponotus aethiops. Journal of Insect Physiology, 56(1), 88–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinsphys.2009.09.007 Google Scholar

Hager, F. A., Kirchner, L., & Kirchner, W. H. (2017). Directional vibration sensing in the leafcutter ant Atta sexdens. Biology Open, 6(12), 1949–1952. https://doi.org/10.1242/bio.029587 Google Scholar

Hölldobler, B. (1971). Sex pheromone in the ant Xenomyrmex floridanus. Journal of Insect Physiology, 17(8), 1497–1499. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1910(71)90158-2 Google Scholar

Hölldobler, B. (1976). Behavioral ecology of mating in harvester ants. Behavoral &. Ecological Sociobiology, 1, 405–423.Google Scholar

Hölldobler, B. & Wilson, E. O. (1990). The Ants. (Belknap, , Ed.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Holman, L., Jørgensen, C. G., Nielsen, J., & d’Ettorre, P. (2010). Identification of an ant queen pheromone regulating worker sterility. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 277(1701), 3793–3800. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2010.0984 Google Scholar

Kaptein, N., Billen, J., & Gobin, B. (2005). Larval begging for food enhances reproductive options in the ponerine ant Gnamptogenys striatula. Animal Behaviour, 69(2), 293–299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2004.04.012 Google Scholar

Khalife, A., Keller, R. A., Billen, J. et al. (2018). Skeletomuscular adaptations of head and legs of Melissotarsus ants for tunnelling through living wood. Frontiers in Zoology, 15(30). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12983-018-0277-6 Google Scholar

Larabee, F. J., Smith, A. A., & Suarez, A. V. (2018). Snap-jaw morphology is specialized for high-speed power amplification in the Dracula ant, Mystrium camillae. Royal Society Open Science, 5(12). https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.181447 Google Scholar

Larsen, J., Nehring, V., d’Ettorre, P., & Bos, N. (2016). Task specialization influences nestmate recognition ability in ants. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 70(9), 1433–1440. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-016-2152-9 Google Scholar

Leboeuf, A. C., Waridel, P., Brent, C. S., Gonçalves, A. N., Menin, L., Ortiz, D., … Keller, L. (2016). Oral transfer of chemical cues, growth proteins and hormones in social insects. ELife, 5(November 2016), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.20375 Google Scholar

Lenoir, A. & Jaisson, P. (1982). Evolution et rôle des communications antennaires chez les insectes sociaux. In Jaisson, P. (Ed.), Social Insects in the Tropics (pp. 157–180). Paris: Université Paris-Nord.Google Scholar

Lenoir, A., Fresneau, D., Errard, C., & Hefetz, A. (1999). Individuality and Colonial Identity in Ants: The Emergence of the Social Representation Concept. In Detrain, C., Deneubourg, J. L., & Pasteels, J. M. (Eds.), Information Processing in Social Insects (pp. 219–237). Basel: Birkhäuser. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-0348-8739-7_12 Google Scholar

Löfqvist, J. (1976). Formic acid and saturated hydrocarbons as alarm pheromones for the ant Formica rufa. Journal of Insect Physiology, 22(10), 1331–1346. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1910(76)90155-4 Google Scholar

Macquart, D., Garnier, L., Combe, M. et al. (2006). Ant navigation en route to the goal: Signature routes facilitate way-finding of Gigantiops destructor. Journal of Comparative Physiology A, 192, 221–234. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00359-005-0064-7 Google Scholar

Manser, M. B., Madden, J. R., Kunc, H. P., English, S., & Clutton-Brock, T. (2008). Signals of need in a cooperatively breeding mammal with mobile offspring. Animal Behaviour, 76(6), 1805–1813. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2008.07.027 Google Scholar

Markl, H. (1973). The Evolution of Stridulatory Communication in Ants. In International Union for the Study of Social Insect (pp. 258–265), Congress 1973. Proceedings IUSSI VIIth International Congress, London, 10–15 September, 1973. Southampton: University of Southampton.Google Scholar

McElligott, A., Gammell, M., Harty, H. et al. (2001). Sexual size dimorphism in fallow deer (Dama dama): Do larger, heavier males gain greater mating success? Behavioral & Ecological Sociobiology, 49, 266–272. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002650000293 Google Scholar

Mercier, J. L., Lenoir, J. C., Eberhardt, A., Frohschammer, S., Williams, C., & Heinze, J. (2007). Hammering, mauling, and kissing: Stereotyped courtship behavior in Cardiocondyla ants. Insectes Sociaux, 54(4), 403–411. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00040-007-0960-7 Google Scholar

Monnin, T. & Peeters, C. (1999). Dominance hierarchy and reproductive conflicts among subordinates in a monogynous queenless ant. Behavioral Ecology, 10(3), 323–332. https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/10.3.323 Google Scholar

Monnin, T., Ratnieks, F. L. W., Jones, G. R., & Beard, R. (2002). Pretender punishment induced by chemical signalling in a queenless ant. Nature, 419(6902), 61–65. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature00932 Google Scholar

Nash, D. R., Als, T. D., Maile, R., Jones, G. R., & Boomsma, J. J. (2008). A mosaic of chemical coevolution in a large blue butterfly. Science, 319(5859), 88–90. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1149180 Google Scholar

Penick, C. A., Prager, S. S., & Liebig, J. (2012). Juvenile hormone induces queen development in late-stage larvae of the ant Harpegnathos saltator. Journal of Insect Physiology, 58(12), 1643–1649. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinsphys.2012.10.004 Google Scholar

Perez, M., Rolland, U., Giurfa, M., & D’Ettorre, P. (2013). Sucrose responsiveness, learning success, and task specialization in ants. Learning and Memory, 20(8), 417–420. https://doi.org/10.1101/lm.031427.113 Google Scholar

Perez, M., Giurfa, M. & d’Ettorre, P. (2015). The scent of mixtures: Rules of odour processing in ants. Science Reports, 5, 8659. DOI:10.1038/srep08659Google Scholar

Pintea, C. M., Pop, P. C., & Chira, C. (2017). The generalized traveling salesman problem solved with ant algorithms. Complex Adaptive Systems Modeling, 5(8). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40294-017-0048-9 Google Scholar

Piqueret, B., Sandoz, J. C., & d’Ettorre, P. (2019). Ants learn fast and do not forget: Associative olfactory learning, memory and extinction in Formica fusca. Royal Society Open Science, 6. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.190778 Google Scholar

Provecho, Y. & Josens, R. (2009). Olfactory memory established during trophallaxis affects food search behaviour in ants. Journal of Experimental Biology, 212(20), 3221–3227. https://doi.org/10.1242/jeb.033506 Google Scholar

Rossi, N., Baracchi, D., Giurfa, M., & d’Ettorre, P. (2018). Pheromone-induced accuracy of nestmate recognition in carpenter ants: Simultaneous decrease in type I and type II errors. The American Naturalist, 193(2), 267–278. https://doi.org/10.1086/701123 Google Scholar

Sala, M., Casacci, L. Pietro, Balletto, E., Bonelli, S., & Barbero, F. (2014). Variation in butterfly larval acoustics as a strategy to infiltrate and exploit host ant colony resources. PLoS One, 9(4), 20–23. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0094341 Google Scholar

Sandoz, J. C. (2011). Behavioral and neurophysiological study of olfactory perception and learning in honeybees. Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience, 5. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnsys.2011.00098 Google Scholar

Santos, J. C., Korndörfer, A. P., & Del-Claro, K. (2005). Defensive behavior of the weaver ant Camponotus (Myrmobrachys) senex (Formicidae: Formicinae): Drumming and mimicry. Sociobiology, 46(2), 279–288. https://doi.org/www.csuchico.edu/biol/Sociobiology/sociobiologyindex.html Google Scholar

Schiappa, J. & Van Hee, R. (2012). From ants to staples: History and ideas concerning suturing techniques. Acta Chirurgica Belgica, 112(5), 395–402. https://doi.org/10.1080/00015458.2012.11680861 Google Scholar

Schultz, T. R. (2000). In search of ant ancestors. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 97(26), 14028–14029. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.011513798 Google Scholar

Shokouhi, M., Shadab Mehr, H., Mafi, E., & Rahnama, M. (2016). Optimization of main public transport paths based on accessibility – case study: Mashhad, Iran. Journal of Public Transportation, 19(1), 114–128. https://doi.org/10.5038/2375-0901.19.1.8 Google Scholar

Soroker, V., Vienne, C., Hefetz, A., & Nowbahari, E. (1994). The postpharyngeal gland as a “gestalt” organ for nestmate recognition in the ant Cataglyphis niger. Naturwissenschaften, 81(11), 510–513. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01132686 Google Scholar

Topoff, H. & Greenberg, L. (1988). Mating behavior of the socially-parasitic ant Polyergus breviceps: The role of the mandibular glands. Psyche (New York), 95(1–2), 81–87. https://doi.org/10.1155/1988/62921 Google Scholar

Tumlinson, J. H., Silverstein, R. M., Moser, J. C., Brownlee, R. G., & Ruth, J. M. (1971). Identification of the trail pheromone of a leaf-cutting ant, Atta texana. Nature, 234(5328), 348–349. https://doi.org/10.1038/234348b0 Google Scholar

Walter, F., Fletcher, D. J. C., Chautems, D., Cherix, D., Keller, L., Francke, W., … Vargo, E. L. (1993). Identification of the sex pheromone of an ant, Formica lugubris (Hymenoptera, Formicidae). Naturwissenschaften, 80(1), 30–34. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01139755 Google Scholar

Wenseleers, T., Helanterä, H., Hart, A., & Ratnieks, F. L. W. (2004). Worker reproduction and policing in insect societies: An ESS analysis. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 17(5), 1035–1047. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1420-9101.2004.00751.x Google Scholar

Wheeler, D. E. (1986). Developmental and physiological determinants of caste in social hymenoptera: Evolutionary implications. The American Naturalist, 128(1), 13–34. https://doi.org/10.1086/284536 Google Scholar

Wheeler, D. E. & Buck, N. A. (1992). Protein, lipid and carbohydrate use during metamorphosis in the fire ant, Solenopsis xyloni. Physiological Entomology, 17(4), 397–403. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3032.1992.tb01038.x Google Scholar

Wyatt, T. D. (2014). Pheromones and Animal Behavior. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139030748 Google Scholar

Zahavi, A. (2008). The Handicap Principle and Signalling in Collaborative Systems. In d’Ettorre, P. & Hughes, D. P. (Eds.), Sociobiology of Commmunication: An Interdisciplinary Perspective (pp. 1–9). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Van Zweden, J. S., Fürst, M. A., Heinze, J., & d’Ettorre, P. (2007). Specialization in policing behaviour among workers in the ant Pachycondyla inversa. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 274(1616), 1421–1428. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2007.0113 Google Scholar

van Zweden, J. S. & d’Ettorre, P. (2010). Nestmate Recognition in Social Insects and the Role of Hydrocarbons. In Blomquist, G. & Bagnères, A. (Eds.), Insect Hydrocarbons: Biology, Biochemistry, and Chemical Communication (pp. 222–243). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511711909 Google Scholar

Ziegelbecker, A., Richter, F., & Sefc, K. M. (2018). Colour pattern predicts outcome of female contest competition in a sexually monomorphic fish. Biological Letters, 1420180480. http://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2018.0480 Google Scholar

References

Chakraborty, M., Walløe, S., Nedergaard, S., Fridel, E. E., Dabelsteen, T., Pakkenberg, B., et al. (2015). Core and shell song systems unique to the parrot brain. PLoS One, 10(6), e0118496. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0118496.Google Scholar

Clements, K., Gray, S. L., Gross, B., & Pepperberg, I. M. (2018). Initial evidence for probabilistic learning by a Grey parrot (Psittacus erithacus). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 132, 166–177.Google Scholar

Denison, S., Bonawitz, E., Gopnik, A., & Griffiths, T. L. (2013). Rational variability in children’s causal inferences: The Sampling Hypothesis. Cognition, 126, 285–300.Google Scholar

Denison, S. & Xu, F. (2014). The origins of probabilistic inference in human infants. Cognition, 130, 335–347.Google Scholar

Driver, R. (1978) When is a stage not a stage? A critique of Piaget’s theory of cognitive development and its application to science education. Educational Research, 21, 54–61,Google Scholar

Eckert, J., Rakoczy, H., & Call, J. (2017). Are great apes able to reason from multi-item samples to populations of food items? American Journal of Primatology, 79(10). https://doi.org/10.1002/ ajp.22693 Google Scholar

Eckert, J., Call, J., Hermes, J., Herman, E., & Rakoczy, H. (2018a). Intuitive statistical inferences in chimpanzees and humans follow Weber’s law. Cognition, 180, 99–107.Google Scholar

Eckert, J., Rakoczy, H., Call, J., Hermann, E., & Hanus, D. (2018b). Chimpanzees consider humans’ psychological states when drawing statistical inferences. Current Biology, 28, 1959–1963.Google Scholar

Gardner, R. A. & Gardner, B. T. (1969). Teaching sign language to a chimpanzee. Science, 187, 644–672.Google Scholar

Griffin, D. (1976). The Question of Animal Awareness. New York: Rockefeller University Press.Google Scholar

Gutiérrez-Ibáñez, C., Iwaniuk, A. N., & Wylie, D. R. (2018). Parrots have evolved a primate-like telencephalic-midbrain-cerebellar circuit. Scientific Reports, 8, 9960. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-28301-4.Google Scholar

Hedges, S. B., Parker, P. H., Sibley, C. G., & Kumar, S. (1996). Continental breakup and the ordinal diversification of birds and mammals. Nature, 381, 226–229.Google Scholar

Hsee, C. K. (1998). Less is better: When low-value options are valued more highly than high-value options. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 11, 107–121.Google Scholar

Jarvis, E. D., Yu, J., Rivas, M. V., Horita, H., Feenders, G. et al. (2013). Global view of the functional molecular organization of the avian cerebrum: Mirror images and functional columns. Journal of Comparative Neurology, 521, 3614–3665.Google Scholar

Kanizsa, G. (1955/1987). Margini quasi-percettivi in campi con stimulazione omogenea. Rivista di Psicologia, 49, 7–30 [translated in Petry, S. & Meyer, G. (Eds.), 1987. The Perception of Illusory Contours. New York: Springer].Google Scholar

Kanizsa, G. (1979). Organization in Vision: Essays on Gestalt Perception. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger Publishers.Google Scholar

Karmiloff-Smith, A. (1992). Beyond Modularity: A Developmental Perspective on Cognitive Science. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press/Bradford Books.Google Scholar

Mazengenya, P., Bhagwandin, A., Manger, P. R., & Ihunwo, A. O. (2018). Putative adult neurogenesis in Old World parrots: The Congo African Grey parrot (Psittacus erithacus) and the timneh Grey parrot (Psittacus timneh). Frontiers in Neuroanatomy, 12,7, doi: 10.3389/fnana.2018.00007.Google Scholar

Miles, H. L. (1978). Language Acquisition in Apes and Children. In Peng, F. C. C. (Ed.), Sign Language and Language Acquisition in Man and Ape (pp. 108–120). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar

Minini, L. & Jeffery, K. J. (2006). Do rats use shape to solve “shape discriminations”? Learning & Memory, 13, 287–297.Google Scholar

Morgane, P. J., Jacobs, M. S., & Galaburda, A. (1986). Evolutionary Morphology of the Dolphin Brain. In Schusterman, R. J., Thomas, J. A., & Wood, F. G. (Eds.), Dolphin Cognition and Behavior: A Comparative Approach (pp. 5–29). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Müller, J. & Reisz, R. R. (2005). Four well-constrained calibrations from the vertebrate fossil record for molecular clock estimates. BioEssays, 27, 1069–1075.Google Scholar

Nagasaka, Y., Brooks, D. I., & Wasserman, E. A. (2010). Amodal completion in bonobos. Learning & Motivation, 41, 174–186.Google Scholar

Olkowicz, S., Kocourek, M., Lŭcan, R. K., Porteš, M., Fitch, W. T., Herculano- Houzel, S., et al. (2016). Birds have primate-like numbers of neurons in the forebrain. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, U.S.A., 113, 7255–7260.Google Scholar

Pattison, K. F. & Zentall, T. R. (2014). Suboptimal choice by dogs: When less is better than more. Animal Cognition, 17, 1019–1022.Google Scholar

Pepperberg, I. M. (1981). Functional vocalizations by an African Grey parrot (Psittacus erithacus). Zeitschrift für Tierpsychologie, 55, 139–160.Google Scholar

Pepperberg, I. M. (1999). The Alex Studies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Pepperberg, I. M. (2006a). Grey parrot (Psittacus erithacus) numerical abilities: Addition and further experiments on a zero-like concept. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 120, 1–11.Google Scholar

Pepperberg, I. M. (2006b). Ordinality and inferential abilities of a Grey parrot (Psittacus erithacus). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 120, 205–216.Google Scholar

Pepperberg, I. M. (2007). Grey parrots do not always “parrot”: Roles of imitation and phonological awareness in the creation of new labels from existing vocalizations. Language Sciences, 29, 1–13.Google Scholar

Pepperberg, I. M. (2009). Grey parrot vocal learning: Creation of new labels from existing vocalizations and issues of imitation. LACUS Forum, 34, 21–30.Google Scholar

Pepperberg, I. M. (2012). Symbolic Communication in the Grey Parrot. In Vonk, J. & Shackelford, T. (Eds.), Oxford Handbook of Comparative Evolutionary Psychology (pp. 772–834). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Pepperberg, I. M. (2017). Review of studies on visual perception in Grey parrots (Psittacus erithacus): The Müller-Lyer illusion, amodal and modal completion. Animal Behavior and Cognition, 4, 378–395.Google Scholar

Pepperberg, I. M. & Gordon, J. D. (2005). Number comprehension by a Grey parrot (Psittacus erithacus), including a zero-like concept. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 119, 197–209.Google Scholar

Pepperberg, I. M., Vicinay, J., & Cavanagh, P. (2008). The Müller-Lyer illusion is processed by a Grey parrot (Psittacus erithacus). Perception, 37, 765–781.Google Scholar

Pepperberg, I. M. & Carey, S. (2012). Grey parrot number acquisition: The inference of cardinal value from ordinal position on the numeral list. Cognition, 125, 219–232.Google Scholar

Pepperberg, I. M. & Nakayama, K. (2016). Robust representation of shape in a Grey parrot (Psittacus erithacus). Cognition, 153, 146–160.Google Scholar

Piaget, J. & Inhelder, B. (1975). The Origin of the Idea of Chance in Children (Leake, L., Trans.). New York, NY: Norton.Google Scholar

Premack, D. (1978). On the Abstractness of Human Concepts: Why It Would Be Difficult to Talk to a Pigeon. In Hulse, S. H., Fowler, H. & Honig, W. K. (Eds.), Cognitive Processes in Animal Behavior (pp. 421–451). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Rakoczy, H., Clüver, A., Saucke, L., Stoffregen, N., Gräener, A., Migura, J., & Call, J. (2014). Apes are intuitive statisticians. Cognition, 131, 60–68.Google Scholar

Regolin, L. & Vallortigara, G. (1995). Perception of partly occluded objects in young chicks. Perception and Psychophysics, 57, 971–976.Google Scholar

Richards, D. G., Woltz, J. P., & Herman, L. M. (1984). Vocal mimicry of computer-generated sounds and labeling of objects by a bottle-nosed dolphin (Tursiops truncatus). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 98, 10–28.Google Scholar

Rubinstein, A. (2002). Irrational diversification in multiple decision problems. European Economic Review, 46, 1369–1378.Google Scholar

Rumbaugh, D. (Ed.). (1977). Language Learning by a Chimpanzee: The LANA Project. New York: Academic. Eds. Oakley, D. A. & Plotkin, H. C.. London: Methuen, 126–153.Google Scholar

Sarich, V. M. & Cronin, J. E. (1977). Generation length and rates of hominid evolution. Nature, 269, 354–355.Google Scholar

Shinskey, J. L. & Munakata, Y. (2005). Familiarity breeds searching: Infants reverse their novelty preferences when reaching for hidden objects. Psychological Science, 16, 596–600.Google Scholar

Tecwyn, E. C., Denison, S., Messer, E. J. E., & Buchsbaum, D. (2017). Intuitive probabilistic inference in capuchin monkeys. Animal Cognition, 20, 244–256.Google Scholar

Téglás, E., Vul, E., Girotto, V., Gonzalez, M., Tenenbaum, J. B., & Bonatti, L. L. (2011). Pure reasoning in 12-month-old infants as probabilistic inference. Science, 332, 1054–1059.Google Scholar

Téglás, E., Ibanez-Lillo, A., Costa, A., & Bonatti, L. L. (2015). Numerical representations and intuitions of probabilities at 12 months. Developmental Science, 18, 183–193.Google Scholar

References

Agnetta, B., Hare, B., & Tomasello, M. (2000). Cues to food location that domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) of different ages do and do not use. Animal Cognition, 3 (2), 107–112.Google Scholar

Albuquerque, N., Guo, K., Wilkinson, A., Savalli, C., Otta, E., & Mills, D. (2016). Dogs recognize dog and human emotions. Biology Letters, 12(1), 20150883.Google Scholar

Albuquerque, N., Guo, K., Wilkinson, A., Resende, B., & Mills, D. S. (2018). Mouth-licking by dogs as a response to emotional stimuli. Behavioural Processes, 146, 42–45.Google Scholar

Allen, W. F. (1937). Olfactory and trigeminal conditioned reflexes in dogs. American Journal of Physiology, 118, 532–540.Google Scholar

Andics, A., Gábor, A., Gácsi, M., Faragó, T., Szabó, D., & Miklósi, Á. (2016). Neural mechanisms for lexical processing in dogs. Science, 353 (6303), 1030–1032.Google Scholar

Andics, A. & Miklósi, Á. (2018). Neural processes of vocal social perception: Dog-human comparative fMRI studies. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 85, 54–64.Google Scholar

Asa, C. S., Mech, L. D., & Seal, U. S. (1985). The use of urine, faeces, and anal-gland secretions in scent-marking by a captive wolf (Canis lupus) pack. Animal Behaviour, 33(3), 1034–1036.Google Scholar

Asa, C. S., Mech, L. D., Seal, U. S., & Plotka, E. D. (1990). The influence of social and endocrine factors on urine-marking by captive wolves (Canis lupus). Hormones and Behavior, 24 (4), 497–509.Google Scholar

Ashmead, D. H., Clifton, R. K., & Reese, E. P. (1986). Development of auditory localization in dogs: Single source and precedence effect sounds. Developmental Psychobiology, 19(2), 91–103.Google Scholar

Barber, A. L. A., Randi, D., Müller, C. A., & Huber, L. (2016). The processing of human emotional faces by pet and lab dogs: Evidence for lateralization and experience effects. PLoS One, 11(4), e0152393.Google Scholar

Baun, M. M., Bergstrom, N., & Langston, N. F. L. T. (1984). Physiological effects of human/companion animal bonding. Nursing Research, 33(3), 126–129.Google Scholar

Bekoff, M. (1974). Social play in coyotes, wolves and dogs. BioScience, 24(4), 225–230.Google Scholar

Bence, M., Elek, Z., Kis, A., Kubinyi, E., Lakatos, G., Miklósi, Á., … Rónai, Z. (2013). Analysis of oxytocin receptor gene as putative component of social behavior in family dogs. Behavior Genetics, 43(6), 509.Google Scholar

Bleicher, N. (1963). Physical and behavioral analysis of dog vocalizations. American Journal of Veterinary Research, 24, 415–427.Google Scholar

Bognár, Z., Iotchev, I. B., & Kubinyi, E. (2018). Sex, skull length, breed, and age predict how dogs look at faces of humans and conspecifics. Animal Cognition, 21 (4), 447–456.Google Scholar

Bradshaw, J. W. & Nott, H. M. (1995). Social and Communication Behaviour of Companion Dogs. In Serpell, J. A. (Ed.), The Domestic Dog: Its Evolution, Behavior and Interactions with People (pp. 115–130). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Bradshaw, J. W. & Rooney, N. I. C. O. L. A. (2016). Dog Social Behavior and Communication. In Serpell, J. A. (Ed.), The Domestic Dog: Its Evolution, Behavior and Interactions with People. 2nd ed. (pp. 133–159). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Bräuer, J., Schönefeld, K., & Call, J. (2013). When do dogs help humans? Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 148 (1), 138–149.Google Scholar

Brisbin, I. L. Jr & Austad, S. N. (1991). Testing the individual odour theory of canine olfaction. Animal Behaviour, 42(1), 63–69.Google Scholar

Brown, D. S. & Johnston, R. E. (1983). Individual Discrimination on the Basis of Urine in Dogs and Wolves. In Müller-Schwarze, D. (Ed.), Chemical Signals in Vertebrates 3 (pp. 343–346). New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar

Byosiere, S. E., Chouinard, P. A., Howell, T. J., & Bennett, P. C. (2018). What do dogs (Canis familiaris) see? A review of vision in dogs and implications for cognition research. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 25 (5), 1798–1813.Google Scholar

Charnetski, C. J., Riggers, S., & Brennan, F. X. (2004). Effect of petting a dog on immune system function. Psychological Reports, 95, 1087–1091.Google Scholar

Chen, M., Daly, M., Williams, N., Williams, S., Williams, C., & Williams, G. (2000). Non-invasive detection of hypoglycaemia using a novel, fully biocompatible and patient friendly alarm system. BMJ, 321 (7276), 1565–1566.Google Scholar

Clutton-Brock, J. (1997). Origins of the Dog: Domestication and Early History. In Serpell, J. (Ed.), The Domestic Dog: Its Evolution, Behavior and Interactions with People (2–19). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Cohen, J. A. & Fox, M. W. (1976). Vocalization in wild canids and possible effects of domestication. Behavioural Processes, 1(1), 77–92.Google Scholar

Coppinger, R.. & Coppinger, L. (2001). Dogs: A Startling New Understanding of Canine Origin, Behavior & Evolution. New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar

Coscia, E. M., Phillips, D. P., & Fentress, J. C. (1991). Spectral analysis of neonatal wolf Canis lupus vocalizations. Bioacoustics, 3 (4), 275–293.Google Scholar

Coscia, M., A. (1995). Ontogeny of Timber Wolf Vocalizations: Acoustic Properties and Behavioural Contexts. Doctoral Dissertation, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Canada.Google Scholar

Csibra, G. & Gergely, G. (2006). Social Learning and Social Cognition: The Case for Pedagogy. In Munakata, Y. & Johnson, M. H. (Eds.), Processes of Change in Brain and Cognitive Development: Attention and Performance XXI (pp. 249–274). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Dale, R., Palma-Jacinto, S., Marshall-Pescini, S., & Range, F. (2019). Wolves, but not dogs, are prosocial in a touch screen task. PLoS One 14 (5), e0215444.Google Scholar

D’Aniello, B., Scandurra, A., Alterisio, A., Valsecchi, P., & Prato-Previde, E. (2016). The importance of gestural communication: A study of human–dog communication using incongruent information. Animal Cognition, 19 (6), 1231–1235.Google Scholar

D’Aniello, B., Semin, G. R., Alterisio, A., Aria, M., & Scandurra, A. (2018). Interspecies transmission of emotional information via chemosignals: From humans to dogs (Canis lupus familiaris). Animal Cognition, 21 (1), 67–78.Google Scholar

Derix, R. R. W. M. (1994). The Social Organisation of Wolves and African Wild Dogs: An Empirical and Model-Theoretical Approach. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands.Google Scholar

Faragó, T., Andics, A., Devecseri, V., Kis, A., Gácsi, M., & Miklósi, Á. (2014). Humans rely on the same rules to assess emotional valence and intensity in conspecific and dog vocalizations. Biology Letters, 10 (1), 20130926.Google Scholar

Faragó, T., Takács, N., Miklósi, Á., & Pongrácz, P. (2017). Dog growls express various contextual and affective content for human listeners. Royal Society Open Science, 4(5), 170134.Google Scholar

Feddersen-Petersen, D. U. (2000). Vocalisation of European wolves (Canis lupus lupus L.) and various dog breeds (Canis lupus f. familiaris). Archiv für Tierzucht, 43, 387–397.Google Scholar

Feddersen-Petersen, D. U. (2007). Social Behaviour of Dogs and Related Canids. In: Jensen, P. (Ed.), The Behavioural Biology of Dogs, Wallington, UK: CAB, International.Google Scholar

Fox, M. (1970). A comparative study of the development of facial expressions in canids: Wolf, coyote and foxes. Behaviour, 36 (1–2), 49–73.Google Scholar

Fox, M. (1971). Behaviour of Wolves, Dogs and Related Canids. London: Jonathan Cape.Google Scholar

Gácsi, M., Kara, E., Belényi, B., Topál, J., & Miklósi, Á. (2009). The effect of development and individual differences in pointing comprehension of dogs. Animal Cognition, 12 (3), 471–479.Google Scholar

Gergely, A., Faragó, T., Galambos, Á., & Topál, J. (2017). Differential effects of speech situations on mothers’ and fathers’ infant-directed and dog-directed speech: An acoustic analysis. Scientific Reports, 7 (1), 13739.Google Scholar

Goodwin, D., Bradshaw, J. W., & Wickens, S. M. (1997). Paedomorphosis affects agonistic visual signals of domestic dogs. Animal Behaviour, 53 (2), 297–304.Google Scholar

Halpin, Z. T. (1986). Individual odors among mammals: Origins and functions. Advances in the Study of Behavior, 16, 39-70.Google Scholar

Hardin, D. S., Anderson, W., & Cattet, J. (2015). Dogs can be successfully trained to alert to hypoglycemia samples from patients with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Therapy, 6 (4), 509–517.Google Scholar

Harrington, F. H. & Mech, L. D. (1979). Wolf howling and its role in territory maintenance. Behaviour, 68 (3), 207-249.Google Scholar

Heffner, H. E. (1983). Hearing in large and small dogs: Absolute thresholds and size of the tympanic membrane. Behavioral Neuroscience, 97 (2), 310–318.Google Scholar

Hepper, P. G. (1994). Long term retention of kinship recognition established during infancy in the domestic dog. Behavioural Processes, 33 (1–2), 3–14.Google Scholar

Hirsh-Pasek, K. & Treiman, R. (1982). Doggerel: Motherese in a new context. Journal of Child Language, 9 (1), 229–237.Google Scholar

Jacobs, G. H. (1993). The distribution and nature of colour vision among the mammals. Biological Reviews, 68 (3), 413–471.Google Scholar

Jensen, P., Persson, M. E., Wright, D., Johnsson, M., Sundman, A. S., & Roth, L. S. V. (2016). The genetics of how dogs became our social allies. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 25(5), 334–338.Google Scholar

Kaminski, J., Call, J., & Fischer, J. (2004). Word learning in a domestic dog: Evidence for” fast mapping.” Science, 304 (5677), 1682–1683.Google Scholar

Kaminski, J., Hynds, J., Morris, P., & Waller, B. M. (2017). Human attention affects facial expressions in domestic dogs. Scientific Reports, 7, 12914.Google Scholar

Kaminski, J., Neumann, M., Bräuer, J., Call, J., & Tomasello, M. (2011). Dogs, Canis familiaris, communicate with humans to request but not to inform. Animal Behaviour, 82 (4), 651–658.Google Scholar

Kaminski, J. & Nitzschner, M. (2013). Do dogs get the point? A review of dog–human communication ability. Learning and Motivation, 44 (4), 294–302.Google Scholar

Kaminski, J., Schulz, L., & Tomasello, M. (2012). How dogs know when communication is intended for them. Developmental Science, 15 (2), 222–232.Google Scholar

Kaminski, J. & Piotti, P. (2016). Current trends in dog-human communication: Do dogs inform? Current Directions in Psychological Science, 25 (5), 322–326.Google Scholar

Kis, A., Ciobica, A., & Topál, J. (2017). The effect of oxytocin on human-directed social behaviour in dogs (Canis familiaris). Hormones and Behaviour, 94, 40–52.Google Scholar

Kis, A., Bence, M., Lakatos, G., Pergel, E., Turcsán, B., Pluijmakers, J., … Kubinyi, E. (2014). Oxytocin receptor gene polymorphisms are associated with human directed social behavior in dogs (Canis familiaris). PLoS One, 9(1), e83993.Google Scholar

Kleiman, D. (1966 ). Scent marking in the Canidae. Symposia of the Zoological Society of London, 18, 167–177.Google Scholar

Kostarczyk, E. & Fonberg, E. (1981). Heart rate mechanisms in instrumental conditioning reinforced by petting in dogs. Physiology & Behavior, 28 (1), 27–30.Google Scholar

Kubinyi, E., Virányi, Z., & Miklósi, Á. (2007). Comparative social cognition: From wolf and dog to humans. Comparative Cognition & Behavior Reviews, 2(1), 26–46.Google Scholar

Kuhne, F., Hoessler, J. C., & Struwe, R. (2012). Affective behavioural responses by dogs to tactile human-dog interactions. Berliner und Munchener Tierarztliche Wochenschrift, 125, 371–378.Google Scholar

Leaver, S. D. A. & Reimchen, T. E. (2008). Behavioural responses of Canis familiaris to different tail lengths of a remotely-controlled life-size. Behaviour, 145(3), 377–390.Google Scholar

McGreevy, P., Grassi, T. D., & Harman, A. M. (2004). A strong correlation exists between the distribution of retinal ganglion cells and nose length in the dog. Brain, Behavior and Evolution, 63(1), 13–22.Google Scholar

Mech, L. D. & Boitani, L. (2010). Wolves: Ecology, Behavior and Conservation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Mech, L. D. (2001). “Standing over” and “hugging” in wild wolves. Canadian Field-Naturalist, 115, 179–181.Google Scholar

Merola, I., Prato-Previde, E., & Marshall-Pescini, S. (2012). Social referencing in dog-owner dyads? Animal Cognition, 15(2), 175–185.Google Scholar

Miklósi, Á. (2015). Dog Behaviour, Evolution, and Cognition. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Miklósi, Á., Polgárdi, R., Topál, J., & Csányi, V. (2000). Intentional behaviour in dog-human communication: An experimental analysis of “showing” behaviour in the dog. Animal Cognition, 3(3), 159–166.Google Scholar

Miklósi, Á. & Topál, J. (2013). What does it take to become ‘best friends’? Evolutionary changes in canine social competence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 17(6), 287–294.Google Scholar

Miller, P. E. & Murphy, C. J. (1995). Vision in dogs. Journal-American Veterinary Medical Association, 207(12), 1623–1634.Google Scholar

Mills, D. S., Ramos, D., Estellés, M. G., & Hargrave, C. (2006). A triple blind placebo-controlled investigation into the assessment of the effect of dog appeasing pheromone (DAP) on anxiety related behaviour of problem dogs in the veterinary clinic. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 98(1-2), 114–126.Google Scholar

Molnár, C., Pongrácz, P., Faragó, T., Dóka, A., & Miklósi, Á. (2009). Dogs discriminate between barks: The effect of context and identity of the caller. Behavioural Processes, 82(2), 198–201.Google Scholar

Morton, E. S. (1977). On the occurrence and significance of motivation-structural rules in some bird and mammal sounds. The American Naturalist,111(981), 855–869.Google Scholar

Müller, C. A., Schmitt, K., Barber, A. L., & Huber, L. (2015). Dogs can discriminate emotional expressions of human faces. Current Biology, 25(5), 601–605.Google Scholar

Neitz, J., Geist, T., & Jacobs, G. H. (1989). Color vision in the dog. Visual Neuroscience, 3(2), 119–125.Google Scholar

Ostojić, L. & Clayton, N. S. (2014). Behavioural coordination of dogs in a cooperative problem-solving task with a conspecific and a human partner. Animal Cognition, 17(2), 445–459.Google Scholar

Pageat, P. & Gaultier, E. (2003). Current research in canine and feline pheromones. Veterinary Clinics: Small Animal Practice, 33(2), 187–211.Google Scholar

Petterson, H., Kaminski, J., Herrmann, E., & Tomasello, M. (2011). Understanding of human communicative motives in domestic dogs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 133(3-4), 235–245.Google Scholar

Pilley, J. W. (2013). Border collie comprehends sentences containing a prepositional object, verb, and direct object. Learning and Motivation, 44(4), 229–240.Google Scholar

Pinc, L., Bartoš, L., Reslová, A., & Kotrba, R. (2011). Dogs discriminate identical twins. PLoS One, 6(6), 4–7.Google Scholar

Piotti, P. & Kaminski, J. (2016). Do dogs provide information helpfully? PLoS One, 11(8), e0159797.Google Scholar

Polgár, Z., Kinnunen, M., Újváry, D., Miklósi, Á., & Gácsi, M. (2016). A test of canine olfactory capacity: Comparing various dog breeds and wolves in a natural detection task. PLoS One, 11(5), e0154087.Google Scholar

Pongrácz, P., Molnár, C., Dóka, A., & Miklósi, Á. (2011). Do children understand man’s best friend? Classification of dog barks by pre-adolescents and adults. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 135(1-2), 95–102.Google Scholar

Pongrácz, P., Molnár, C., & Miklósi, Á. (2010). Barking in family dogs: An ethological approach. Veterinary Journal, 183(2), 141–147.Google Scholar

Pongrácz, P., Molnár, C., Miklósi, Á., & Csányi, V. (2005). Human listeners classify dog barks in different situations. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 119(2), 136–144.Google Scholar

Pongrácz, P., Molnár, C., & Miklósi, Á. (2006). Acoustic parameters of dog barks carry emotional information for humans. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 100(3-4), 228-240.Google Scholar

Range, F. & Virányi, Z. (2015). Tracking the evolutionary origins of dog-human cooperation: The “Canine Cooperation Hypothesis.” Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 1582.Google Scholar

Raymer, J., Wiesler, D., Novotny, M., Asa, C., Seal, U. S., & Mech, L. D. (1985). Chemical investigations of wolf (Canis lupus) anal-sac secretion in relation to breeding season. Journal of Chemical Ecology, 11(5), 593–608.Google Scholar

Riedel, J., Schumann, K., Kaminski, J., Call, J., & Tomasello, M. (2008). The early ontogeny of human–dog communication. Animal Behaviour, 75(3), 1003–1014.Google Scholar

Rooney, N. J., Bradshaw, J. W. S., & Robinson, I. H. (2001). Do dogs respond to play signals given by humans? Animal Behaviour, 61(4), 715–722.Google Scholar

Savalli, C., Resende, B., & Gaunet, F. (2016). Eye contact is crucial for referential communication in pet dogs. PLoS One, 11(9), e0162161.Google Scholar

Schassburger, R. M. (1987). Wolf vocalization: An integrated model of structure, motivation and ontogeny. In Frank, H. (Ed.), Man and Wolf, Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Dr. W. Junk Publishers.Google Scholar

Schassburger, R. M. (1993). Vocal Communication in the Timber Wolf, Canis Lupus, Linnaeus: Structure, Motivation, and Ontogeny. Advances in Ethology, no. 30. Berlin/Hamburg: Paul Parey Scientific Publishers.Google Scholar

Schenkel, R. (1947). Expression studies of wolves. Behaviour,1(8), 1–129.Google Scholar

Siniscalchi, M., d’Ingeo, S., & Quaranta, A. (2016). The dog nose “KNOWS” fear: Asymmetric nostril use during sniffing at canine and human emotional stimuli. Behavioural Brain Research, 304, 34-41.Google Scholar

Siniscalchi, M., d’Ingeo, S., & Quaranta, A. (2018). Orienting asymmetries and physiological reactivity in dogs’ response to human emotional faces. Learning & Behavior, 46(4), 574–585.Google Scholar

Serpell, J. (2017). The Domestic Dog: Its Evolution, Behavior and Interactions with People. 2nd ed. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Somppi, S., Törnqvist, H., Hänninen, L., Krause, C., & Vainio, O. (2014). How dogs scan familiar and inverted faces: An eye movement study. Animal Cognition, 17(3), 793–803.Google Scholar

Somppi, S., Törnqvist, H., Topál, J., Koskela, A., Hänninen, L., Krause, C. M., & Vainio, O. (2017). Nasal oxytocin administration alters the gazing behavior and pupil dilatation in domestic dogs. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1854.Google Scholar

Strain, G. M., Tedford, B. L., & Jackson, R. M. (1991). Postnatal development of the brain stem auditory-evoked potential in dogs. American Journal of Veterinary Research, 52(3), 410–415.Google Scholar

Tauzin, T., Csík, A., Kis, A., Kovács, K., & Topál, J. (2015). The order of ostensive and referential signals affects dogs’ responsiveness when interacting with a human. Animal Cognition, 18(4), 975–979.Google Scholar

Téglás, E., Gergely, A., Kupán, K., Miklósi, Á., & Topál, J. (2012). Dogs’ gaze following is tuned to human communicative signals. Current Biology, 22(3), 209–212.Google Scholar

Topál, J., Kis, A., & Oláh, K. (2014). Dogs’ sensitivity to human ostensive cues: A unique adaptation? In Kaminski, J., Marshall-Pescini, S. (Eds.), The Social Dog: Behaviour and Cognition (pp. 319–346). London UK: Elsevier.Google Scholar

Topál, J., Miklósi, Á., Gácsi, M., Dóka, A., Pongrácz, P., Kubinyi, E., … & Csányi, V. (2009). The dog as a model for understanding human social behavior. Advances in the Study of Behavior, 39, 71–116.Google Scholar

Udell, M. A. R., & Wynne, C. D. L. (2010). Ontogeny and phylogeny: Both are essential to human-sensitive behavior in the genus Canis. Animal Behaviour, 79(2), 9–14.Google Scholar

van Hooff, J. A. R. A. M. & Wensing, J. A. B. (1987). Dominance and its Behavioral Measures in a Captive Wolf Pack. In Frank, H. (Ed.), Man and Wolf (pp. 219–252), Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Dr. W. Junk Publishers.Google Scholar

Virányi, Z., Gácsi, M., Kubinyi, E., Topál, J., Belényi, B., Ujfalussy, D., & Miklósi, Á. (2008). Comprehension of human pointing gestures in young human-reared wolves (Canis lupus) and dogs (Canis familiaris). Animal Cognition, 11(3), 373–387.Google Scholar

Virányi, Z., Topál, J., Gácsi, M,, Miklósi, Á., & Csányi, V. (2004). Dogs respond appropriately to cues of humans’ attentional focus. Behavioural Processes, 66(2), 161–172.Google Scholar

Vormbrock, J. K., & Grossberg, J. M. (1988). Cardiovascular effects of human–pet dog interactions. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 11(5), 509–517.Google Scholar

Wang, G. D., Zhai, W., Yang, H. C., Wang, L., Zhong, L., Liu, Y. H., … Zhang, Y. P. (2016). Out of southern East Asia: The natural history of domestic dogs across the world. Cell Research, 26, 21–33.Google Scholar

Worsley, H. K. & O’Hara, S. J. (2018). Cross-species referential signalling events in domestic dogs (Canis familiaris). Animal Cognition, 21(4), 457–465.Google Scholar

Wysocki, C. J. (1979). Neurobehavioral evidence for the involvement of the vomeronasal system in mammalian reproduction. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 3(4), 301–341.Google Scholar

Zimen, E. (1981). The Wolf: His Place in the Natural World. London: Souvenir Press.Google Scholar

References

Adams, F. & Beighley, S. M. (2013). Information, meaning and animal communication. In Stegmann, U. E. (Ed.), Animal Communication Theory: Information and Influence, (399–420), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Andrieu, J., Penny, S. G., Bouchet, H., Malaivijitnond, S., Reichard, U. H., & Zuberbühler, K. (2020). White-handed gibbons discriminate context-specific song compositions. PeerJ, 8, e9477. doi: 10.7717/peerj.9477Google Scholar

Arnold, K. & Zuberbühler, K. (2006a). Semantic combinations in primate calls. Nature, 441(7091), 303.Google Scholar

Arnold, K. & Zuberbühler, K. (2006b). The alarm-calling system of adult male putty-nosed monkeys, Cercopithecus nictitans martini. Animal Behavior, 72, 643–653.Google Scholar

Arnold, K. & Zuberbühler, K. (2008). Meaningful call combinations in a non-human primate. Current Biology, 18(5), R202–R203. https://doi.org/Doi 10.1016/J.Cub.2008.01.040 Google Scholar

Arnold, K. & Zuberbühler, K. (2012). Call combinations in monkeys: Compositional or idiomatic expressions? Brain and Language, 120(3), 303–309. https://doi.org/Doi 10.1016/J.Bandl.2011.10.001 Google Scholar

Arnold, K. & Zuberbühler, K. (2013). Female putty-nosed monkeys use experimentally altered contextual information to disambiguate the cause of male alarm calls. PLoS One, 8(6), Article e65660. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0065660 Google Scholar

Berthet, M., Neumann, C., Mesbahi, G., Casar, C., & Zuberbühler, K. (2018). Contextual encoding in titi monkey alarm call sequences. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 72(1), Article Unsp 8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-017-2424-z Google Scholar

Caesar, C., Byrne, R., Young, R. J., & Zuberbühler, K. (2012). The alarm call system of wild black-fronted titi monkeys, Callicebus nigrifrons. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 66(5), 653–667. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-011-1313-0 Google Scholar

Caesar, C., Byrne, R. W., Hoppitt, W., Young, R. J., & Zuberbüehler, K. (2012). Evidence for semantic communication in titi monkey alarm calls. Animal Behaviour, 84(2), 405–411. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2012.05.010 Google Scholar

Cheney, D., Seyfarth, R., & Silk, J. (1995). The responses of female baboons (Papio cynocephalus ursinus) to anomalous social interactions: Evidence for causal reasoning? Journal of Comparative Psychology, 109(2), 134–141.Google Scholar

Clarke, E., Reichard, U., & Zuberbühler, K. (2006). The syntax and meaning of wild gibbon songs. PLoS One, 1(1), e73.Google Scholar

Clay, Z. & Zuberbühler, K. (2009). Food-associated calling sequences in bonobos. Animal Behaviour, 77(6), 1387–1396. https://doi.org/Doi10.1016/J.Anbehav.2009.02.016 Google Scholar

Clay, Z., Archbold, J., & Zuberbühler, K. (2015). Functional flexibility in wild bonobo vocal behaviour. PeerJ, 3, e1124. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.1124 Google Scholar

Coye, C., Ouattara, K., Zuberbühler, K., & Lemasson, A. (2015). Suffixation influences receivers’ behaviour in non-human primates. Proceedings of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences, 282(1807), 50265.Google Scholar

Crockford, C., Gruber, T., & Zuberbühler, K. (2018). Chimpanzee quiet hoo variants differ according to context. Royal Society Open Science, 5(5), Article 172066. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.172066 Google Scholar

Engesser, S., Crane, J. M. S., Savage, J. L., Russell, A. F., & Townsend, S. W. (2015). Experimental evidence for phonemic contrasts in a nonhuman vocal system. PLoS Biology, 13(6), Article e1002171. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1002171 Google Scholar

Engesser, S., Ridley, A., & Townsend, S. (2016). Meaningful call combinations and compositional processing in the southern pied babbler. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(21), 5976–5981. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1600970113 Google Scholar

Engh, A. L., Hoffmeier, R. R., Cheney, D. L., & Seyfarth, R. M. (2006). Who, me? Can baboons infer the target of vocalizations? Animal Behaviour, 71, 381–387.Google Scholar

Fedurek, P., Zuberbühler, K., & Dahl, C. D. (2016). Sequential information in a great ape utterance. Scientific Reports, 6, Article 38226. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep38226 Google Scholar

Kaminski, J., Call, J., & Fischer, J. (2004). Word learning in a domestic dog: Evidence for “fast mapping.” Science, 304(5677), 1682–1683.Google Scholar

Kersken, V., Zuberbühler, K., & Gomez, J.-C. (2017). Listeners can extract meaning from non-linguistic infant vocalisations cross-culturally. Scientific Reports, 7, Article 41016. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep41016 Google Scholar

Laporte, M. N. C. & Zuberbühler, K. (2010). Vocal greeting behaviour in wild chimpanzee females. Animal Behaviour, 80(3), 467–473. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2010.06.005 Google Scholar

Locke, J. (1690/1959). An Essay Concerning Human Understanding. New York: Dover.Google Scholar

Manser, M. B. (2016). Referents and Semantics in Animal Vocalizations. In Bee, M. A. & Miller, C. T. (Eds.), Psychological Mechanisms in Animal Communication, (Vol. 5, 223–249). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-48690-1_8 Google Scholar

Ogden, C. K. & Richards, I. A. (1959). The Meaning of Meaning. New York: Harcourt.Google Scholar

Oller, D. K., Buder, E. H., Ramsdell, H. L., Warlaumont, A. S., Chorna, L., & Bakeman, R. (2013). Functional flexibility of infant vocalization and the emergence of language. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 110(16), 6318–6323. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1300337110 Google Scholar

Ouattara, K., Lemasson, A., & Zuberbühler, K. (2009). Campbell’s monkeys use affixation to alter call meaning. PLoS One, 4(11), e7808.Google Scholar

Palmer, M. S. & Gross, A. (2018). Eavesdropping in an African large mammal community: Antipredator responses vary according to signaller reliability. Animal Behaviour, 137, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2017.12.018 Google Scholar

Price, T. & Fischer, J. (2014). Meaning attribution in the West African green monkey: Influence of call type and context. Animal Cognition, 17(2), 277–286. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-013-0660-9 Google Scholar

Price, T., Ndiaye, O., Hammerschmidt, K., & Fischer, J. (2014). Limited geographic variation in the acoustic structure of and responses to adult male alarm barks of African green monkeys. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 68(5), 815–825. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-014-1694-y Google Scholar

Price, T., Wadewitz, P., Cheney, D., Seyfarth, R., Hammerschmidt, K., & Fischer, J. (2015). Vervets revisited: A quantitative analysis of alarm call structure and context specificity. Scientific Reports, 5, Article 13220. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep13220 Google Scholar

Rendall, D. & Owren, M. J. (2013 ). Communication without Meaning or Information: Abandoning Language-Based and Informational Constructs in Animal Communication Theory. In Stegmann, U. E. (Ed.), Animal Communication Theory: Information and Influence, (151–188), New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar

Rescorla, R. A. & Wagner, A. R. (1972). A Theory of Pavlovian Conditioning: Variations in the Effectiveness of Reinforcement and Nonreinforcement. In Black, A. & Prokasy, W., (Eds.), Classical Conditioning II: Current Research and Theory, (64–69), New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar

Ristau, C. A. (2013). Cognitive ethology. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews-Cognitive Science, 4(5), 493–509. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.1239 Google Scholar

Schamberg, I., Wittig, R. M., & Crockford, C. (2018). Call type signals caller goal: A new take on ultimate and proximate influences in vocal production. Biological Reviews, 93(4), 2071–2082. https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.12437 Google Scholar

Schel, A. M. & Zuberbühler, K. (2009). Responses to leopards are independent of experience in Guereza colobus monkeys. Behaviour, 146, 1709–1737.Google Scholar

Schlenker, P., Chemla, E., Schel, A. M., Fuller, J., Gautier, J. P., Kuhn, J., Veselinovic, D., Arnold, K., Casar, C., Keenan, S., Lemasson, A., Ouattara, K., Ryder, R., & Zuberbühler, K. (2016a). Formal monkey linguistics. Theoretical Linguistics, 42(1–2), 1–90. https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2016-0001 Google Scholar

Schlenker, P., Chemla, E., Schel, A. M., Fuller, J., Gautier, J. P., Kuhn, J., Veselinovic, D., Arnold, K., Casar, C., Keenan, S., Lemasson, A., Ouattara, K., Ryder, R., & Zuberbühler, K. (2016b). Formal monkey linguistics: The debate. Theoretical Linguistics, 42(1–2), 173–201. https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2016-0010 Google Scholar

Schlenker, P., Chemla, E., & Zuberbühler, K. (2016c). What do monkey calls mean? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20(12), 894–904. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2016.10.004 Google Scholar

Seyfarth, R. M. & Cheney, D. L. (1980). The ontogeny of vervet monkey alarm calling behavior – a preliminary-report. Zeitschrift Fur Tierpsychologie-Journal of Comparative Ethology, 54(1), 37–56.Google Scholar

Seyfarth, R. M., Cheney, D. L., & Marler, P. (1980a). Monkey responses to three different alarm calls: Evidence of predator classification and semantic communication. Science, 210, 801–803.Google Scholar

Seyfarth, R. M., Cheney, D. L., & Marler, P. (1980b). Vervet monkey alarm calls: Semantic communication in a free-ranging primate. Animal Behaviour, 28(4), 1070–1094.Google Scholar

Seyfarth, R. M. & Cheney, D. L. (1990). The assessment by vervet monkeys of their own and another species’ alarm calls. Animal Behaviour, 40(4), 754–764.Google Scholar

Seyfarth, R. M. & Cheney, D. L. (2017). The origin of meaning in animal signals. Animal Behaviour, 124, 339–346. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2016.05.020 Google Scholar

Seyfarth, R. & Cheney, D. (2018). Pragmatic flexibility in primate vocal production. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 21, 56–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2018.02.005 Google Scholar

Sievers, C. & Gruber, T. (2016). Reference in human and non-human primate communication: What does it take to refer? Animal Cognition, 19(4), 759–768. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-016-0974-5 Google Scholar

Slocombe, K. E. & Zuberbühler, K. (2005). Agonistic screams in wild chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes schweinfurthii) vary as a function of social role. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 119(1), 67–77.Google Scholar

Slocombe, K. E. & Zuberbühler, K. (2006). Food-associated calls in chimpanzees: Responses to food types or food preferences? Animal Behaviour, 72, 989–999.Google Scholar

Slocombe, K. E., Townsend, S. W., & Zuberbühler, K. (2009). Wild chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes schweinfurthii) distinguish between different scream types: Evidence from a playback study. Animal Cognition, 12(3), 441–449. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-008-0204-x Google Scholar

Slocombe, K. E., Kaller, T., Call, J., & Zuberbühler, K. (2010). Chimpanzees extract social information from agonistic screams. PLoS One, 5(7), Article e11473. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0011473 Google Scholar

Smith, W. J. (1977). The Behavior of Communicating: An Ethological Approach. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Stephan, C. & Zuberbühler, K. (2008). Predation increases acoustic complexity in primate alarm calls. Biology Letters, 4(6), 641–644. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2008.0488 Google Scholar

Stephan, C. & Zuberbühler, K. (2014). Predation affects alarm call usage in female Diana monkeys (Cercopithecus diana diana). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 68(2), 321–331. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-013-1647-x Google Scholar

Stephan, C. & Zuberbühler, K. (2016). Social familiarity affects Diana monkey (Cercopithecus diana diana) alarm call responses in habitat-specific ways. Royal Society open science, 3(2), Article 150639. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.150639 Google Scholar

Suzuki, T. N., Wheatcroft, D., & Griesser, M. (2016). Experimental evidence for compositional syntax in bird calls. Nature Communications, 7, Article 10986. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms10986 Google Scholar

Szabó, Z. G. (2017). Compositionality. In Zalta, E. N. (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2017 Edition ed.). Available at: https://plato.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/encyclopedia/archinfo.cgi?entry=compositionality Google Scholar

Thorndike, E. L. (1898). Animal Intelligence: An Experimental Study of the Associative Processes in Animals. London: The Macmillan Company.Google Scholar

Townsend, S. W., Engesser, S., Stoll, S., Zuberbühler, K., & Bickel, B. (2018). Compositionality in animals and humans. PLoS Biology, 16(8), Article e2006425. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.2006425 Google Scholar

Wegdell, F., Hammerschmidt, K., & Fischer, J. (2019). Conserved alarm calls but rapid auditory learning in monkey responses to novel flying objects. Nature Ecology & Evolution, 3(7), 1039–1042. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-019-0903-5 Google Scholar

Wittig, R. M., Crockford, C., Langergraber, K. E., & Zuberbühler, K. (2014). Triadic social interactions operate across time: A field experiment with wild chimpanzees. Proceedings of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences, 281(1779). https://doi.org/Artn 20133155 Doi 10.1098/Rspb.2013.3155Google Scholar

Zuberbühler, K. (2000a). Causal knowledge of predators’ behaviour in wild Diana monkeys. Animal Behaviour, 59, 209–220. https://doi.org/10.1006/anbe.1999.1296 Google Scholar

Zuberbühler, K. (2000b). Interspecies semantic communication in two forest primates. Proceedings of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences, 267(1444), 713–718. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2000.1061 Google Scholar

Zuberbühler, K. (2009). Survivor signals: The biology and psychology of animal alarm calling. Advances in the Study of Behavior, 40, 277–322. https://doi.org/Doi 10.1016/S0065–3454(09)40008-1 Google Scholar

Zuberbühler, K. (2016). Social Concepts and Communication in Nonhuman Primates. In Bee, M. A. & Miller, C. T. (Eds.), Psychological Mechanisms in Animal Communication, (Vol. 5, 251–270). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-48690-1_9 Google Scholar

Zuberbühler, K., Cheney, D. L., & Seyfarth, R. M. (1999). Conceptual semantics in a nonhuman primate. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 113(1), 33–42. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7036.113.1.33 Google Scholar

Zuberbühler, K. (2000). Causal cognition in a non-human primate: Field playback experiments with Diana monkeys. Cognition, 76, 195–207.Google Scholar

Zuberbühler, K. (2002). A syntactic rule in forest monkey communication. Animal Behaviour, 63, 293–299.Google Scholar

Zuberbühler, K. (2019). Evolutionary roads to syntax. Animal Behaviour, 151, 259–265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2019.03.006 Google Scholar

Zuberbühler, K. (2020). Syntax and compositionality in animal communication. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences, 375(1789). doi: 10.1098/rstb.2019.0062Google Scholar

Book contents

Part I - Communication and Language

Summary

Access options

References

References

References

References

References

References

Save book to Kindle

Save book to Dropbox

Save book to Google Drive