scholarly journals Inferential Communication: Bridging the Gap Between Intentional and Ostensive Communication in Non-human Primates

2022 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Warren ◽  
Josep Call
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Complexity ◽  
Communication Systems ◽  
Animal Communication ◽  
Theoretical Perspective ◽  
Psychological State ◽  
Communication Model ◽  
Human Communication ◽  
Primate Communication ◽  
Intentional Communication ◽  
Human Primate

Communication, when defined as an act intended to affect the psychological state of another individual, demands the use of inference. Either the signaler, the recipient, or both must make leaps of understanding which surpass the semantic information available and draw from pragmatic clues to fully imbue and interpret meaning. While research into human communication and the evolution of language has long been comfortable with mentalistic interpretations of communicative exchanges, including rich attributions of mental state, research into animal communication has balked at theoretical models which describe mentalized cognitive mechanisms. We submit a new theoretical perspective on animal communication: the model of inferential communication. For use when existing proximate models of animal communication are not sufficient to fully explain the complex, flexible, and intentional communication documented in certain species, specifically non-human primates, we present our model as a bridge between shallower, less cognitive descriptions of communicative behavior and the perhaps otherwise inaccessible mentalistic interpretations of communication found in theoretical considerations of human language. Inferential communication is a framework that builds on existing evidence of referentiality, intentionality, and social inference in primates. It allows that they might be capable of applying social inferences to a communicative setting, which could explain some of the cognitive processes that enable the complexity and flexibility of primate communication systems. While historical models of animal communication focus on the means-ends process of behavior and apparent cognitive outcomes, inferential communication invites consideration of the mentalistic processes that must underlie those outcomes. We propose a mentalized approach to questions, investigations, and interpretations of non-human primate communication. We include an overview of both ultimate and proximate models of animal communication, which contextualize the role and utility of our inferential communication model, and provide a detailed breakdown of the possible levels of cognitive complexity which could be investigated using this framework. Finally, we present some possible applications of inferential communication in the field of non-human primate communication and highlight the role it could play in advancing progress toward an increasingly precise understanding of the cognitive capabilities of our closest living relatives.

scholarly journals Operationalizing intentionality in primate communication: Social and ecological considerations

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Evelina Daniela Rodrigues ◽  
Marlen Fröhlich
Keyword(s):  
Nonhuman Primate ◽  
Communication Systems ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Communication Studies ◽  
Human Communication ◽  
Primate Communication ◽  
Intentional Communication ◽  
Psychological States ◽  
First Order ◽  
Transfer Of Information

An intentional transfer of information is central to human communication. When comparing nonhuman primate communication systems to language, a critical challenge is to determine whether a signaller intends for the recipient to derive a particular meaning from the message contained in the signal. As it is not possible to directly observe psychological states in any species, comparative researchers have inferred intentionality via behavioural markers derived from studies on pre-linguistic human children. Recent efforts to increase consistency between nonhuman primate communication studies undervalue the effect of possible sources of bias: some behavioural markers are not generalizable across certain signal types (gestures, vocalizations, and facial expressions), contexts, settings and species. Despite laudable attempts to operationalise first-order intentionality across signal types, a true “multimodal” approach requires integration across their sensory components (visual-silent; contact; audible), as a signal from a certain type can comprise more than one sensory component. Here we discuss how the study of intentional communication in non-linguistic systems is hampered by issues of reliability, validity, consistency, and generalizability. We then highlight future research avenues that may help to understand the use of goal-oriented communication by opting, whenever possible, for reliable, valid, and consistent behavioural markers, but taking into account sampling biases and integrating detailed observations of intra-specific communicative interactions.

scholarly journals Operationalizing Intentionality in Primate Communication: Social and Ecological Considerations

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Evelina D. Rodrigues ◽  
Marlen Fröhlich
Keyword(s):  
Nonhuman Primate ◽  
Communication Systems ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Communication Studies ◽  
Human Communication ◽  
Primate Communication ◽  
Intentional Communication ◽  
Psychological States ◽  
Transfer Of Information ◽  
Behavioral Markers

AbstractAn intentional transfer of information is central to human communication. When comparing nonhuman primate communication systems to language, a critical challenge is to determine whether a signal is used in intentional, goal-oriented ways. As it is not possible to directly observe psychological states in any species, comparative researchers have inferred intentionality via behavioral markers derived from studies on prelinguistic human children. Recent efforts to increase consistency in nonhuman primate communication studies undervalue the effect of possible sources of bias: some behavioral markers are not generalizable across certain signal types (gestures, vocalizations, and facial expressions), contexts, settings, and species. Despite laudable attempts to operationalize first-order intentionality across signal types, a true “multimodal” approach requires integration across their sensory components (visual-silent, contact, audible), as a signal from a certain type can comprise more than one sensory component. Here we discuss how the study of intentional communication in nonlinguistic systems is hampered by issues of reliability, validity, consistency, and generalizability. We then highlight future research avenues that may help to understand the use of goal-oriented communication by opting, whenever possible, for reliable, valid, and consistent behavioral markers, but also taking into account sampling biases and integrating detailed observations of intraspecific communicative interactions.

scholarly journals Comparative perspectives on communication in human and nonhuman primates: Grounding meaning in broadly conserved processes of voice production, perception, affect and cognition

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan Nielsen ◽  
Drew Rendall
Keyword(s):  
Structure Function ◽  
Communication Systems ◽  
Nonhuman Primates ◽  
Common Ground ◽  
Animal Communication ◽  
Human Communication ◽  
Voice Production ◽  
General Constraints ◽  
Affect And Cognition ◽  
Synthetic Approaches

Comparative perspectives on primate and human communication have been marked by two equally untenable extremes: either language is special, without significant evolutionary precedent, or it is not: it is continuous in most aspects with animal communication systems. In this article we outline fertile common ground and point towards synthetic approaches that can unify the study of human and animal communication. First, we suggest that humans have a large suite of perceptual biases that introduce a pressure for languages to be 'functionally deployable'. We suggest that human languages are shaped by this pressure, along with previously established pressures to be both learnable and compressible, and domain-general constraints like memory. Collectively, we suggest that non-arbitrary structure-function relationships are crucial for the deployment of language and communication systems more generally.

scholarly journals Animal cognition and the evolution of human language: why we cannot focus solely on communication

2019 ◽  
Vol 375 (1789) ◽  
pp. 20190046 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. Tecumseh Fitch
Keyword(s):  
Communication Systems ◽  
Animal Communication ◽  
Language Evolution ◽  
Animal Cognition ◽  
Small Subset ◽  
Human Language ◽  
Human Communication ◽  
Theme Issue ◽  
Royal Road ◽  
Communicative Signals

Studies of animal communication are often assumed to provide the ‘royal road’ to understanding the evolution of human language. After all, language is the pre-eminent system of human communication: doesn't it make sense to search for its precursors in animal communication systems? From this viewpoint, if some characteristic feature of human language is lacking in systems of animal communication, it represents a crucial gap in evolution, and evidence for an evolutionary discontinuity. Here I argue that we should reverse this logic: because a defining feature of human language is its ability to flexibly represent and recombine concepts, precursors for many important components of language should be sought in animal cognition rather than animal communication. Animal communication systems typically only permit expression of a small subset of the concepts that can be represented and manipulated by that species. Thus, if a particular concept is not expressed in a species' communication system this is not evidence that it lacks that concept. I conclude that if we focus exclusively on communicative signals, we sell the comparative analysis of language evolution short. Therefore, animal cognition provides a crucial (and often neglected) source of evidence regarding the biology and evolution of human language. This article is part of the theme issue ‘What can animal communication teach us about human language?’

scholarly journals Scratching beneath the surface: intentionality in great ape signal production

2019 ◽  
Vol 375 (1789) ◽  
pp. 20180403 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kirsty E. Graham ◽  
Claudia Wilke ◽  
Nicole J. Lahiff ◽  
Katie E. Slocombe
Keyword(s):  
Communication Systems ◽  
Animal Communication ◽  
Research Effort ◽  
Great Ape ◽  
Cognitive Mechanisms ◽  
Theme Issue ◽  
Intentional Communication ◽  
Evolutionary Origins ◽  
Signal Production ◽  
Communicative Signals

Despite important similarities having been found between human and animal communication systems, surprisingly little research effort has focussed on whether the cognitive mechanisms underpinning these behaviours are also similar. In particular, it is highly debated whether signal production is the result of reflexive processes, or can be characterized as intentional. Here, we critically evaluate the criteria that are used to identify signals produced with different degrees of intentionality, and discuss recent attempts to apply these criteria to the vocal, gestural and multimodal communicative signals of great apes and more distantly related species. Finally, we outline the necessary research tools, such as physiologically validated measures of arousal, and empirical evidence that we believe would propel this debate forward and help unravel the evolutionary origins of human intentional communication. This article is part of the theme issue ‘What can animal communication teach us about human language?’

scholarly journals Convergent minds: ostension, inference and Grice's third clause

2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 20160107 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Moore
Keyword(s):  
Animal Species ◽  
Animal Communication ◽  
Human Communication ◽  
Intentional Communication ◽  
Psychological States ◽  
Successful Communication ◽  
Gricean Communication ◽  
Ostensive Communication ◽  
Intentional Structure ◽  
Prevailing View

A prevailing view is that while human communication has an ‘ostensive-inferential’ or ‘Gricean’ intentional structure, animal communication does not. This would make the psychological states that support human and animal forms of communication fundamentally different. Against this view, I argue that there are grounds to expect ostensive communication in non-human clades. This is because it is sufficient for ostensive communication that one intentionally addresses one's utterance to one's intended interlocutor—something that is both a functional pre-requisite of successful communication and cognitively undemanding. Furthermore, while ostension is an important feature of intentional communication, the inferences required in Gricean communication may be minimal: ostension and inference may come apart. The grounds for holding that animal communication could not be Gricean are therefore weak. I finish by defending the idea that a ‘minimally Gricean’ model of communication is a valuable tool for characterizing the communicative interactions of many animal species.

scholarly journals Reflections on Protolanguage: Evidence from Studies on Animal Communication

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 113
Author(s):  
Aziz Jaber ◽  
Osama Omari ◽  
Mujdey Abudalbuh
Keyword(s):  
Convergent Evolution ◽  
Communication Systems ◽  
Animal Communication ◽  
Language Evolution ◽  
Intermediate Stage ◽  
Necessary Condition ◽  
Human Language ◽  
Human Communication ◽  
Semantic Compositionality ◽  
Human Animal

The paper is a critique of the existence of protolanguage based on some personal reasoning given the findings of previous research. This paper focuses on the nature of semantic compositionality and its existence (and therefore manifestations) in animal communication systems as evidence of the existence of protolanguage. This compositional state that started to color human language has paved the way to hierarchical syntax and thus has helped in the emergence of a recursive, fully complex language. On the other hand, non-human animal communication systems, including those examined in this paper, have not managed to progress beyond the holophrastic state, and thus remained highly confined and unproductive. This is explicated by the observation that these systems do not employ discrete meaningful units that can be used recursively in different linguistic contexts, a necessary condition for a system of communication to be compositional. This is interesting in the study of language evolution as it could suggest that human language could not have evolved from a rudimentary, intermediate stage called protolanguage. Speculating about the existence of protolanguage subsumes convergent evolution (e.g. songbirds). The lack of semantic compositionality in non-human communication system suggests that convergent evolution is hard to prove, which puts the existence of protolanguage on the line. This thesis is, however, far from being established and requires a lot of further research to prove its validity.   Received: 21 September 2020 / Accepted: 3 November 2020 / Published: 17 January 2021

scholarly journals The fitness and functionality of culturally evolved communication systems

2008 ◽  
Vol 363 (1509) ◽  
pp. 3553-3561 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicolas Fay ◽  
Simon Garrod ◽  
Leo Roberts
Keyword(s):  
Communication Systems ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
Animal Communication ◽  
Global Alignment ◽  
Human Communication ◽  
Detection Experiment ◽  
Sign Systems ◽  
Communication Task ◽  
Graphical Communication ◽  
Efficient Decoding

This paper assesses whether human communication systems undergo the same progressive adaptation seen in animal communication systems and concrete artefacts. Four experiments compared the fitness of ad hoc sign systems created under different conditions when participants play a graphical communication task. Experiment 1 demonstrated that when participants are organized into interacting communities, a series of signs evolve that enhance individual learning and promote efficient decoding. No such benefits are found for signs that result from the local interactions of isolated pairs of interlocutors. Experiments 2 and 3 showed that the decoding benefits associated with community evolved signs cannot be attributed to superior sign encoding or detection. Experiment 4 revealed that naive overseers were better able to identify the meaning of community evolved signs when compared with isolated pair developed signs. Hence, the decoding benefits for community evolved signs arise from their greater residual iconicity. We argue that community evolved sign systems undergo a process of communicative selection and adaptation that promotes optimized sign systems. This results from the interplay between sign diversity and a global alignment constraint; pairwise interaction introduces a range of competing signs and the need to globally align on a single sign-meaning mapping for each referent applies selection pressure.

scholarly journals Vocal plasticity in a reptile

2017 ◽  
Vol 284 (1855) ◽  
pp. 20170451 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henrik Brumm ◽  
Sue Anne Zollinger
Keyword(s):  
Signal Detection ◽  
Communication Systems ◽  
Vocal Communication ◽  
Animal Communication ◽  
High Amplitude ◽  
Vocal Plasticity ◽  
Lombard Effect ◽  
Gekko Gecko ◽  
High Degree ◽  
Signalling Systems

Sophisticated vocal communication systems of birds and mammals, including human speech, are characterized by a high degree of plasticity in which signals are individually adjusted in response to changes in the environment. Here, we present, to our knowledge, the first evidence for vocal plasticity in a reptile. Like birds and mammals, tokay geckos ( Gekko gecko ) increased the duration of brief call notes in the presence of broadcast noise compared to quiet conditions, a behaviour that facilitates signal detection by receivers. By contrast, they did not adjust the amplitudes of their call syllables in noise (the Lombard effect), which is in line with the hypothesis that the Lombard effect has evolved independently in birds and mammals. However, the geckos used a different strategy to increase signal-to-noise ratios: instead of increasing the amplitude of a given call type when exposed to noise, the subjects produced more high-amplitude syllable types from their repertoire. Our findings demonstrate that reptile vocalizations are much more flexible than previously thought, including elaborate vocal plasticity that is also important for the complex signalling systems of birds and mammals. We suggest that signal detection constraints are one of the major forces driving the evolution of animal communication systems across different taxa.

scholarly journals Acoustic cues to individuality in wild male adult African savannah elephants (Loxodonta africana)

PeerJ ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. e10736
Author(s):  
Kaja Wierucka ◽  
Michelle D. Henley ◽  
Hannah S. Mumby
Keyword(s):  
Communication Systems ◽  
Animal Communication ◽  
Current Knowledge ◽  
Individual Recognition ◽  
Social Bonds ◽  
Loxodonta Africana ◽  
Mature Male ◽  
Acoustic Cues ◽  
Acoustic Parameters ◽  
Male Adult

The ability to recognize conspecifics plays a pivotal role in animal communication systems. It is especially important for establishing and maintaining associations among individuals of social, long-lived species, such as elephants. While research on female elephant sociality and communication is prevalent, until recently male elephants have been considered far less social than females. This resulted in a dearth of information about their communication and recognition abilities. With new knowledge about the intricacies of the male elephant social structure come questions regarding the communication basis that allows for social bonds to be established and maintained. By analyzing the acoustic parameters of social rumbles recorded over 1.5 years from wild, mature, male African savanna elephants (Loxodonta africana) we expand current knowledge about the information encoded within these vocalizations and their potential to facilitate individual recognition. We showed that social rumbles are individually distinct and stable over time and therefore provide an acoustic basis for individual recognition. Furthermore, our results revealed that different frequency parameters contribute to individual differences of these vocalizations.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document