Apes know that hidden objects can affect the orientation of other objects
Related Experiment Video
Updated: Dec 24, 2025

Author Spotlight: Insights into the Analysis of Human Interaction with 3D Virtual Objects
Published on: October 18, 2024
1Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Deutscher Platz 6, D-04103 Leipzig, Germany. call@eva.mpg.de
Abstract:
Four bonobos, seven gorillas, and six orangutans were presented with two small rectangular boards on a platform. One of the boards had a piece of food under it so that it acquired an inclined orientation whereas the other remained flat on the platform. Subjects preferentially selected the inclined board. In another experiment, subjects were initially presented with two inclined boards and a transformation took place in which one of the boards fell flat to the platform while the other remained inclined. Subjects also preferred the board that remained inclined. Two additional experiments highlighted some of the possible limitations of their reasoning in this task. Presented with two inclined boards, one of which was visibly supported by a piece of wood, they failed to systematically select the unsupported one whose only reason for being inclined was the presence of the reward. Another experiment presented two rewards in each trial (instead of the customary one) in one of the following two combinations: large banana vs. small carrot or small banana vs. large carrot. Prior to the test, E presented both rewards to the subject and then hid each of them under one of the boards so that both boards were differentially inclined due to the different sizes of the rewards involved. Although subjects selected the board that showed a greater inclination (thus securing the larger reward), they disregarded the type of food that was involved. This often meant that they chose the large carrot over the small banana even though they reversed such a choice when the rewards were not occluded by the boards. Providing subjects with a 'reminder' of the type of reward hidden under the boards did not alter the original results. There was no evidence of learning throughout the various experiments and control tests ruled out the possibility of inadvertent cuing by the experimenter, poor performance due to a lack of motivation, or good performance due to a predisposition to select objects with sloped surfaces. It is concluded that subjects made some inferences about the reason for the inclined orientation of the boards, and not simply associated an inclined orientation with the presence of the reward.
Related Concept Videos
Local Attraction
Collisions in Multiple Dimensions: Problem Solving
A small car of mass 1,200 kg traveling east at 60 km/h collides at an intersection with a truck of mass 3,000 kg traveling due north at 40 km/h. The two vehicles are locked together. What is the...
Potential Due to a Polarized Object
Gestalt Principles of Perception
Attitudes
Relative Motion Analysis using Rotating Axes-Problem Solving
Here, in order to determine the magnitude of velocity and acceleration for point...

