Savage-Rumbaugh et al (1986)

48
Savage-Rumbaugh et al (1986) “Spontaneous symbol acquisition and communicative use by pygmy chimpanzees” Lesson 1 – Background & Context

description

Savage-Rumbaugh et al (1986). “ Spontaneous symbol acquisition and communicative use by pygmy chimpanzees ”. Lesson 1 – Background & Context. Starter. “ Furious green ideas sleep peacefully ” : does the sentence make sense? is the sentence grammatical? - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Transcript of Savage-Rumbaugh et al (1986)

Page 1: Savage-Rumbaugh  et al (1986)

Savage-Rumbaugh et al (1986)

“Spontaneous symbol acquisition and communicativeuse by pygmy chimpanzees”

Lesson 1 – Background & Context

Page 2: Savage-Rumbaugh  et al (1986)

“Furious green ideas sleep peacefully”:

does the sentence make sense?

is the sentence grammatical?

how did you make these decisions?

Starter

Page 3: Savage-Rumbaugh  et al (1986)

Learning Objective

At the end of this lesson you should be able to:

- describe the nature-nurture debate regarding language development

Page 4: Savage-Rumbaugh  et al (1986)

Language vs Communication

Language is a system of symbols (words / sounds) which convey meaning.

Communication is the transmission of ‘something’ (a message, signal) from one location to another.

Some form of language is necessary for communication. Linguistic universals are present in all languages.

- Can animals communicate (with one another / with us?)

- Do animals have language?

Page 5: Savage-Rumbaugh  et al (1986)

COMPONENTS OF

LANGUAGE

PHONOLOGY(sound

patterns)

SEMANTICS(meaning patterns)

GRAMMAR(rules of language)

PRAGMATICS(rules of effective

communication)

Page 6: Savage-Rumbaugh  et al (1986)

Children’s Language Development

2 mths – cooing (pre-linguistic) 6 mths – reduplicated babbling (‘dadada’) 12 mths – one-word utterances 18-24 mths – two-word utterances (telegraphic speech) 3 yrs – vocabulary of @1000 words; use of personal

pronoun 6-7 yrs – rules of grammar are masteredLanguage comprehension develops before language

production.

Work out the time-line for language development.

Page 7: Savage-Rumbaugh  et al (1986)

Children’s Language Development

Was this time-line true: - for you - your siblings

Some exceptions / anomalies:

language disorders:

- dyslexia

- (selective) mutism

autism

individual / gender differences

Page 8: Savage-Rumbaugh  et al (1986)

Nature-Nurture Debate

Nurture View(Skinner,

1957)

Nature View (Chomsky,

1965) language is learnt… (Behaviourism)

language is innate / biologically pre-programmed…

through principles of Operant Conditioning (reinforcement or punishment to increase or decrease behaviour)

and is acquired through the existence of an innate processing box (LAD)

child will repeat sounds which have been positively reinforced

critical period (birth – puberty)

implies primates have capacity for learning language

implies primates should show no ability for language

Page 9: Savage-Rumbaugh  et al (1986)

• Explain the nature and nurture debate using Skinner and Chomsky

Page 10: Savage-Rumbaugh  et al (1986)

What makes us human?

What do you think are the main differences between primates and humans? Are there any similarities?

Page 11: Savage-Rumbaugh  et al (1986)

Some differencesHumans have:• a theory of mind (‘Sally-Anne task’)• consciousness / self-awareness • the ability for tool use • language ability • high levels of intelligence • less instinctive behaviour

Some similarities• Living as part of a group• Genetic material (98%)

Page 12: Savage-Rumbaugh  et al (1986)

But what about this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4s0jt8L5V_w

Page 13: Savage-Rumbaugh  et al (1986)

And this?

Page 14: Savage-Rumbaugh  et al (1986)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQCOHUXmEZg

Page 15: Savage-Rumbaugh  et al (1986)

Earlier Research on Primates

Name of Chimp(researchers)

Main Findings

Gua(Kellogg & Kellogg, 1933)

Gua raised with researchers own child (Donald) but never uttered a word.

Vicki(Hayes & Hayes, 1952)

Vicki learnt 4 words in six years: up, cup, mama & papa.

Washoe(Gardner & Gardner,

1969)

Using ASL, Washoe learnt 30 signs over a 22 month period some creativity (“Gimme tickle”) but no structure dependence

Nim Chimpsky(Terrace)

Using ASL, Nim learnt 125 signs over a 4yr period – but was he just imitating his teachers?

Page 16: Savage-Rumbaugh  et al (1986)

Gardner & Gardner (Washoe)• A case study

• Participant - a female chimp

• Age - approx I year old

• Procedure - Washoe lived in a caravan in the Gardner’s garden & was taught American Sign Language (ASL)

Page 17: Savage-Rumbaugh  et al (1986)

Washoe’s progress ...

• First SINGLE WORDS• come, gimme, hurry, sweet, tickle• 34 after 21 months• by 4 years over 100 signs• YES – SEMANTICITY (meaning)• signed TOOTHBRUSH in bathroom • signed FLOWER in garden and when shown picture of

flower

Page 18: Savage-Rumbaugh  et al (1986)

Washoe’s progress ...• YES - CREATIVITY

• Washoe spontaneously used combinations of signs

• GIMME TICKLE - come and tickle me

• OPEN FOOD DRINK - open the fridge

• LISTEN EAT - listen to the dinner gong

• GO SWEET - take me to the raspberry bushes

Page 19: Savage-Rumbaugh  et al (1986)

Washoe’s progress ...

• NO STRUCTURE DEPENDENCE• English children usually put the SUBJECT before the

ACTION• Mummy come• Eve read• Car gone

• Washoe did not seem to do this• GO SWEET or SWEET GO both used for take me to

the raspberry bushes

Page 20: Savage-Rumbaugh  et al (1986)

Plenary

Three things you’ve learnt today.

Page 21: Savage-Rumbaugh  et al (1986)

Savage-Rumbaugh et al (1986)

“Spontaneous symbol acquisition and communicativeuse by pygmy chimpanzees”

Lesson 2 – The Core Study

Page 22: Savage-Rumbaugh  et al (1986)

Learning Objective

At the end of this lesson you should be able to:

- describe the key features of Savage-Rumbaugh et al’s study into ape language

Page 23: Savage-Rumbaugh  et al (1986)

Aim of Study

To study the language acquisition (specifically, comprehension) of two bonobo (or pygmy) chimps (Kanzi & Mulika) and draw comparisons with that of two common chimps (Austin & Sherman) who had been previously studied.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QBlDGX95eys (I will tweet the other parts to this!)

Page 24: Savage-Rumbaugh  et al (1986)

Method:• case study, using• longitudinal design (17 month period)

with observation

Sample:• 4 great apes; focus on Kanzi (male

pygmy chimp) – study began when aged 2:6yrs and separated from his mother; born in captivity.

Page 25: Savage-Rumbaugh  et al (1986)

Apparatus:• Lexigram board – made up of symbols used to stand for words;

these symbols brighten up when touched (256 keys).

• Note: each lexigram did not look like the object or word it stood for.• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kwm4FEB9LC8

Page 26: Savage-Rumbaugh  et al (1986)

Savage-Rumbaugh et al (1986)

The visual symbol system

• Indoors: battery powered keyboard with geometric symbols that brighten when touched, then speech synthesiser ‘speaks’ the word

• Outdoors: copy of keyboard as laminated pointing board

• each symbol called a lexigram

Page 27: Savage-Rumbaugh  et al (1986)

Savage-Rumbaugh et al (1986)

Kanzi’s outdoor environment• 55 acres forest; 17 food locations; must travel to ‘get food’

each location for a specific food type e.g. bananas to treehouse, peaches to lookout

• Kanzi learned where all the food was located• could select a food from photos on the ground and could

guide another person to his chosen location• learned to use the symbols on the keyboard to indicate where

he wanted to go

Page 28: Savage-Rumbaugh  et al (1986)

Savage-Rumbaugh et al (1986)Longitudinal case study - data collection

• records kept of Kanzi’s language development (symbol use) for 17 months

• from the age of 2 1/2

• computerised records from keyboard

• notes from observers when outside

Page 29: Savage-Rumbaugh  et al (1986)

Savage-Rumbaugh et al (1986)Longitudinal case study

The data (assessing Kanzi’s symbol use)• correct or incorrect• spontaneous• imitation• structured (e.g. responds to question)• also behavioural concordance (agreement)• e.g. if request to ‘go to treehouse’ led a person to the treehouse

Page 30: Savage-Rumbaugh  et al (1986)

Procedure:

• bonobos lived at the Language Research Centre (had human companions who also used ASL and spoken English)

• exposed to lexigram keyboard – which eventually consisted of 256 keys

• Kanzi & Mulika learned through observation (mother was Matata) – no formal training provided to chimps

• all utterances were recorded and coded: - correct / incorrect - spontaneous / imitated / structured• criteria for learning of symbol: - behavioural concordance measure (what Kanzi said had to

match up with what he did)• tests consisted of: - ‘blind’ test in forest (with person unconnected with training) - matching photo to lexigram symbol - matching photo to spoken English - matching lexigram symbol to spoken English

Page 31: Savage-Rumbaugh  et al (1986)

Results 1:

• Greater use of specific and untutored gestures by K & M

• Early referential use of lexigrams (M at 12mths)• Symbol acquisition: K = 44; M = 37 lexigrams• ‘Blind test’ in forest – K able to lead

experimenter out of forest by correctly using photos and lexigrams

Page 32: Savage-Rumbaugh  et al (1986)

Results 2:• 80% of K’s utterances were spontaneous• Use of combinations (multiple symbols) –

2,500+ correct and mostly about initiating games

D

A

B

F

Page 33: Savage-Rumbaugh  et al (1986)

Results 3: Formal Vocabulary Tests

• Bonobos can understand spoken English whereas common chimps cannot

Show me the tomato lexigram

Primate

Number correct / total

Matching symbol

to English

Matching photo to English

Matching photo to symbol

K 65/66 56/59 55/59

M 41/42 36/41 41/42

A Not tested 3/30 30/30

S Not tested 2/30 30/30

Page 34: Savage-Rumbaugh  et al (1986)

Conclusions from Study

• Compared to other species of chimp, pygmy chimps appear to be able to learn and use language more like a human child.

• Shows role of nurture (culture learning).

Page 35: Savage-Rumbaugh  et al (1986)

Savage-Rumbaugh et al (1986)

“Spontaneous symbol acquisition and communicativeuse by pygmy chimpanzees”

Lesson 3 – Evaluation & Extension

Page 36: Savage-Rumbaugh  et al (1986)

Thinking Skills

Evaluation

Synthesis

Understanding

Knowledge

Application

Analysis

Approach (Cognitive)

Background & Context

Methods

Results & Conclusions

Strengths & Weaknesses of Savage-Rumbaugh et al’s

study

Issues & Debates

Implications, Applications &

Changes

Page 37: Savage-Rumbaugh  et al (1986)

Issues & Debates

Issues DebatesMethodology Determinism vs Free will

Ethics Nature-nurture

Ecological Validity Reductionism vs Holism

Longitudinal vs Snapshot Ethnocentrism

Qualitative vs Quantitative Data Psychology as science

Approaches Individual / Situational explanations

Perspectives Usefulness

Which of the above issues / debates areraised by the Savage-Rumbaugh study?

Page 38: Savage-Rumbaugh  et al (1986)

Evaluating Savage-Rumbaugh

STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES

Page 39: Savage-Rumbaugh  et al (1986)

Savage-Rumbaugh et al (1986)CONTROL• analysis of videotape against real time coding of symbol

use by 2 observers• 1 scored real time, 1 scored tape, real time observer did

not know the record would be used for reliability check• 100% agreement on correct vs incorrect use of symbols• 1 disagreement over spontaneous use

Page 40: Savage-Rumbaugh  et al (1986)
Page 41: Savage-Rumbaugh  et al (1986)

Evaluation in more detail• The research method could be described as

a longitudinal case study and therefore allows in depth data to be collected and allows development to be studied over time.

• For example, every utterance made by Kanzi was documented by the researchers over a 17 month period.

Page 42: Savage-Rumbaugh  et al (1986)

Evaluation in more detail• It is also possible to argue that the study

was high in ecological validity as Kanzi and the researchers could roam from place to place around the 55 acre site.

• However the ecological validity can also be questioned as the subjects were not reared in their natural environment.

Page 43: Savage-Rumbaugh  et al (1986)

Evaluation in more detail• The data was gathered under rigorous

controls such as the formal tests and are therefore are less likely to be open to bias and subjectivity.

• This improves both reliability and validity.

• Similarly the data gathered were quantitative allowing for analysis and comparisons between chimpanzees to be made.

• Qualitative data were also collected which improves the richness of the study.

Page 44: Savage-Rumbaugh  et al (1986)

Evaluation in more detail• It is possible to criticise the ethical nature

of this study.

• Is it necessary to study chimpanzees in a human environment and to test their language skills in such a formal way?

• Note though that the normal ethical guidelines do not apply to non human animals.

Page 45: Savage-Rumbaugh  et al (1986)

Evaluation in more detail• The researchers did note that they were

generalising from a very small sample of chimpanzees and a study of more subjects would have to be carried out for the study to be more representative.

• Many researchers still doubt whether Kanzi and Mulika were using language in the complex way that humans do

Page 46: Savage-Rumbaugh  et al (1986)

Ways of Investigating Language

primate studies using alternative apparatus / methods:

- American Sign Language (ASL)

- plastic tokens

- brain-scanning technology

longitudinal studies of ‘normal’ humans from birth

studies of children raised by deaf parents (p136)

quasi-experiments / case studies of feral children

- Genie

- Czech twins

http://www.feralchildren.com/en/index.php

Page 47: Savage-Rumbaugh  et al (1986)

And finally… Let’s consider the issues raised by animal

research: - ethics (of separation) - rights of animals – ‘Great Ape Project’

http://www.greatapeproject.org/

Page 48: Savage-Rumbaugh  et al (1986)

Further Resources

• Orgininal article (Savage-Rumbaugh)

• Journal article: ‘’Monkey Business: primates & language”

• Website: http://www.iowagreatapes.org/bonobo/meet/kanzi.php#

• Book: Primate Psychology - Chapter 14 (Language)