Hemelrijk CK (1994) Support for being groomed in long-tailed macaques, Macaca fascicularis. Hayes-Roth B, Hayes-Roth F (1979) A cognitive model of planning. Hampton RR, Hampstead BM, Murray EA (2005) Rhesus monkeys ( Macaca mulatta) demonstrate robust memory for what and where, but not when, in an open-field test of memory. Be Proc 79:19вЂ“27Дufour V, PelГ© M, Sterck EHM, Thierry B (2007) Chimpanzee ( Pan troglodytes) anticipation of food return: coping with waiting time in an exchange task. PLoS ONE 6:e16593Дufour V, Sterck EHM (2008) Chimpanzees fail to plan in an exchange task but succeed in a tool-using procedure. Anim Behav 60:253вЂ“261Дe Waal FBM, Luttrell LM (1988) Mechanisms of social reciprocity in three primate species: symmetrical relationships characteristics or cognition? Ethology and Sociobiology 9:101вЂ“118Дekleva M, Dufour V, de Vries H, Spruijt BM, Sterck EHM (2011) Chimpanzees ( Pan troglodytes) fail a what-where-when task but find rewards by using a location-based association strategy. J Comp Psychol 111:370вЂ“378Дe Waal FBM (2000) Attitudinal reciprocity in food sharing among brown capuchin monkeys. Curr Biol 17:856вЂ“861Дe Waal FBM (1997) Food transfers through mesh in brown capuchins. Primates 46:173вЂ“182Д¬layton NS, Bussey TJ, Dickinson A (2003) Can animals recall the past and plan for the future? Nat Rev Neurosci 4:685вЂ“691Д¬orreia SPC, Dickinson A, Clayton NS (2007) Western scrub-jays anticipate future needs independently of their current motivational state. Primates 25:160вЂ“170Д«rosnan SF, de Waal FBM (2005) Responses to a simple barter task in chimpanzees, ( Pan troglodytes).

Proc R Soc Lond B 266:665вЂ“670Д«oesch C, Boesch H (1984) Mental map in wild chimpanzees: an analysis of hammer transports for nut cracking. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X07002002Д«arrett L, Henzi SP, Weingrill T, Lycett JE, Hill RA (1999) Market forces predict grooming reciprocity in female baboons. doi: 10.1037/a0012624Д«ar M (2007) The continuum of вЂњlooking forwardвЂќ and paradoxical requirements from memory. Instead, these results may reflect subjectsвЂ™ strengths and weaknesses in their time-related comprehension of the task.ДЄnderson JM, Hattori Y, Fujita K (2008) Quality before quantity: rapid learning of reverse-reward contingency by capuchin monkeys ( Cebus apella). This was not the case, however, since in most cases subjects were not already holding the token in their hands before they entered the testing compartment. Given that the frequency of token manipulation predicted transport, success might have occurred by chance. They brought the correct version of three possible token types, but rarely transported more than one suitable token at a time. Three subjects did however manage to solve the task several times, albeit at very low rates. Monkeys mostly failed to transport tokens when entering the testing compartment hence, they do not seem able to plan for a future exchange with a human partner. Subjects who successfully planned for the exchange task were expected to select suitable tokens during a collection period (5/10В min), save them for a fixed period of time (20/30В min), then take them into an adjacent compartment and exchange them for food with an experimenter. The rationale required subjects to plan for a future opportunity to exchange tokens for food by collecting tokens several minutes in advance. We investigate this question further and use a planning-to-exchange task to study future planning in the cooperative domain in two species of monkeys: the brown capuchin ( Cebus apella) and the Tonkean macaque ( Macaca tonkeana). Whether or not non-human animals can plan for the future is a hotly debated issue.

M&b record exchange