TY - JOUR
T1 - Operationalizing intentionality in primate communication
T2 - social and ecological considerations
AU - Rodrigues, Evelina D.
AU - Fröhlich, Marlen
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2021.
PY - 2024/6
Y1 - 2024/6
N2 - 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 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.
AB - 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 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.
KW - Facial expression
KW - Gestures
KW - Intentionality
KW - Primate communication
KW - Social environment
KW - Vocalizations
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85115715778&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s10764-021-00248-w
DO - 10.1007/s10764-021-00248-w
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85115715778
SN - 0164-0291
VL - 45
SP - 501
EP - 525
JO - International Journal of Primatology
JF - International Journal of Primatology
IS - 3
ER -