| 終於又再完成一份paper，還是要謝謝阿菲！ Abstract This paper is going to discuss the comparison between laboratory chimpanzees’ pointing behaviour and the pointing behaviour of human infants. in this paper, the two article have been selected form Gómez (2007), Leaven and Hopkins (1999). Both of these articles have discussed about the comparaison between chimps’ pointing and human infant’s pointing. Also, in this paper, we are going to discuss more about the broader implication of chimps’ study and the limitation of chimps study. The conclusion is that chimps study could provide us a frame work of human infants’ pointing behaviour but chimps’ pointing could not be counted as unique with human infants.
Chimps and Human Pointing: Use Two Articles to Make the Comparison of Pointing Between the Laboratory Chimpanzees and Human Infants at the Early Age of Psychological Development. Pointing is the issue for psychologists to research on the early age of children development. In pointing studies, laboratory chimpanzees usually are the observational subjects. By using the research dates which are observed from chimps, the psychologists try to generalize the dates and apply it to the behavior of human infants’ pointing. In this paper, we are going to discuss the meaning of pointing between chimps and human infants. Some current studies suggest that pointing of laboratory chimps share a certain degree of similar cognitive ability with human infants (Thomasello et al., 2007; as cited in Gómez, 2007 ); however, those studies do not say that chimps are unique with human infants. As a result, the similarity between chimps’ pointing and human infants’ pointing would be discussed in this paper. Although both chimps and human infants share a certain degree of similarity, there are still some differences between them, which are the original purpose of pointing and distinguishing between nature and nurture factors. Therefore, the second issue we are going to discuss is the differences between chimps’ pointing and human infant’s pointing. After discussing the differences, we are going to talk about the implication and the limitation for the chimps’ study. In order to improve the explanation of the pointing between chimps and human infants, the topic of future research would be the last thing that we are going to discuss. Summary of two articles In the article “The Whole-Hand Point: The Structure and Function of Pointing From a Comparative Perspective”, Leaven and Hopkins (1999) suggested that using index-finger to point was a special type of human nature and chimps were pay more attention to the visual stimulus. Unlike human infants, chimps tended to pay less attention to the vocal stimulus while they pointed to an object. Also, in Leaven and Hopkins’s study (1999), they suggested that pointing had included different kinds of reasons: audience effect, for social gesture and paralinguistic gesture. Their conclusion on pointing suggested that captive chimps pointed frequently because they learnt the adoption from human beings (i.e. experimenters and caregivers) (Leavens & Hopkins 1999). In other words, pointing from chimps were rarely in a spontaneously way (Leavens & Hopkins 1999), but human infants point does. The second article, “Pointing Behaviors in Apes and Human Infants: A Balanced Interpretation” Gómez (2007) presented the view of “ balance” interpretation between chimps’ pointing and human infants’ pointing. As she wrote in her paper, pointing required two parts: joint attention and communication. These two requirement brought up the concept of how pointing represent to a kind of language. We can combine two concepts and stated as: pointing is the concept that human infants associate the ideas between different individuals and get into the interaction with them; ultimately to bring up the communication by using pointing. This concept is the same as Leavens & Hopkins (1999). They suggested in their paper and stated that as paralinguistic. Both claims suggested that although some properties of chimps’ pointing’ is similar to human infants’ pointing, chimps’ pointing still cannot be counted as the unique behaviour with human infants’ behaviour. Similarities between chimps and human infants To compare pointing between chimps and human infants, the first consideration is that what are the reasons both chimps and infants take the action of pointing? The first common reason for them to point is both of chimps and human infants are lack of mobility to satisfy their motivation. As Gómez (2007) explained that laboratory chimps were confined in cage. This situation is same as the human infants who could not move to anywhere without the help from their parents or other individuals with mobility. In other words, both of them are helpless to fulfill their goals or take any actions without the external help. As a result, pointing is the tool for them to ask help from others to complete their target. Leavens and Hopkins (1999) presented one of the experiments which tested on the gaze alternation (Mitchell and Anderson, 1997, as cited in Leavens & Hopkins, 1999). This research found that chimps looked at the experimenter while chimps pointed to the baited container. This research is able to provide us on the purpose of chimps’ pointing when they want food from the experimenter. Not surprisingly, human infants will also do the same action to reach their goals; as the explanation in of a 21 months old infant pointed to the direction of his bedroom for his mother (Gómez, 2007). Both the observation results suggested that pointing was the action for chimps and human infants to seek external help for completing their goals and satisfying their motivation. Differences between chimps and human infants However, the lack of mobility for chimps and human infants is also the event that we can critique about: Are the laboratory chimps and human infants immature in the same way, which is just simply because of their lack of mobility? Obviously, laboratory chimps are not in the same situation as the human infants have. Gómez (2007) pointed out that the immature of captive chimps was artificially made “immature” and they must relied on human and learnt from human beings (i.e. experimenter)(Miklosi & Aoporoni, 2006, as cited in Gómez, 2007). From chimps’ point of view, they point at a specific object (e.g. food, drinks) because they cannot reach to the object freely as they are caged. This is different from human infants due to the artificial made immaturity. The reason for human infants cannot move anywhere since the nature immature of motor ability. As a result, the voluntarily effect of learning is the different between laboratory chimps and human infants. In other words, chimps do not learn pointing voluntarily, but human infants do. After we have discussed the similarities and the differences between chimps’ pointing and human infants’ pointing, a short summary should be given. When we look through these two articles, even though captive chimps have shown a certain degree of higher level cognitive complexity as human infants have, chimps’ pointing still cannot be equivalent to human infants’ pointing. This is the critical reason that those dates, collecting form observing chimps, cannot fully apply to explain infants’ behaviour .This brings us to the next topic: what is the limitation of laboratory chimpanzees’ study? Limitations of the chimpanzees, study As we have discussed before, the nurture factor (i.e. environment setting) is the critical point. In wild, chimp does not point frequently (Leavens & Hopkins 1999).By using chimps as the participant; they are usually caged in the laboratory. Therefore, they have to learning how to get help from other. The first thing we should consider is the immaturity differences between chimps and human infants. Human infants learn how to adapt and learn for adults in a natural setting environment (Bruner, 1972; Csibra & Gergely, 2006; as cited in Gómez, 2007). However, the laboratory chimps are raised in laboratory without the interaction with the original environment. As Gómez (2007) said that, captive chimps are “artificially made immature and depent up on humans” (Gómez, 2007) As a result, the distinguish between human and chimps is the environment setting. Second difference between chimps and human infants is the natural difference (i.e. purpose of pointing). This is the difference between protoimperatives pointing and protodeclaratives pointing (Gómez et al., 1993; as cited in Gómez, 2007). Protoimperatives pointing usually use for requesting things from others; protodeclaratives pointing is mainly focus on interaction with other individuals. Chimps are mainly focus on protoimperatives pointing as they request other people to provide things (usually food and drinks). In Leavens & Hopkins (1999), they have presented one of the experiments which show that captive chimps pay more attention to the visual attention than to vocalize attention (Bard, 1992; Bates et al., 1975; Sugarman 1984; as cited in Leavens & Hopkins, 1999). This experiment shows that chimps are more focusing on their internal desire; such as food. However, human infants do not only pay attention to internal drive, but also pay attention to the external environment; such as social interaction. As a result, the differences between chimps and human infants are the nature and nurture setting. These two differences have decrease the plausibility of the result since the confound variables of nature and nurture factors, until now are inevitable. Instead of these limitations, study of chimps still definitely provide us a strong understanding with the meanings of pointing; such as protoimperatives pointing and protodeclaratives pointing(Gómez et al., 1993; as cited in Gómez, 2007). These two articles have provided us the deeper meaning of pointing and the evidences of paralinguistic system. Human infants, although in the early age and lack of mobility, they still have the cognitive ability to form a plan to satisfy their motivations or fulfill their own goals by seek the external help form adults. Chimps also could form a plan to complete the request but their pointing are more emphasize on visual cues. These show that pointing of chimps and human infants are including meanings. In other word, pointing is a kind of language without speech which is called paralinguistic. Discussion Future research could focus on the researching of the existence of pointing behaviour in captive chimps (Gómez, 2007). As Gómez suggested, there was no studies about how laboratory chimps started to point on a specific subject. Study of pointing existence would provide us a better and clearer starting point to see what the initial causes of pointing are. In Gómez’s article , she suggested that if there are any studies about the existence of pointing, the evolutionary perspective of pointing could explain the protodeclaratives pointing on human infants. Conclusion In conclusion, this paper compares the differences and the similarities with the pointing behaviour between laboratory chimps and human infants. Both of the articles suggests that laboratory chimps provide us a better ideas of human infant’s pointing, but chips still cannot be counted as unique with human infants because of the nature and nurture factors (i.e. environmental setting and the purpose of pointing). The study of laboratory chimps also provides us the implication of paralinguistic and the meanings of pointing. The future research could focus on the existence of pointing behaviour for providing a clearer starting point and that would be helpful to develop the evolutionary perspective of pointing. Reference Gómez, Juan-Carlos. (2007). Pointing behaviors in apes and human infants. A Balanced Interpretation, 78(3), 729-734. Leavens, David A, & Hopkins, William D. (1999). The Whole-hand point. The Structure and Function of Pointing From a Comparative Perspective, 113(4), 417-428. |
