Display options
Share it on

R Soc Open Sci. 2015 May 27;2(5):150109. doi: 10.1098/rsos.150109. eCollection 2015 May.

Familiar and unfamiliar face recognition in crested macaques (Macaca nigra).

Royal Society open science

Jérôme Micheletta, Jamie Whitehouse, Lisa A Parr, Paul Marshman, Antje Engelhardt, Bridget M Waller

Affiliations

  1. Centre for Comparative and Evolutionary Psychology, Department of Psychology , University of Portsmouth , Portsmouth, UK.
  2. Center for Translational Social Neuroscience, Silvio O. Conte Center for Oxytocin and Social Cognition, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences , Emory University , Atlanta, GA, USA ; Yerkes National Primate Research Center , Emory University , Atlanta, GA, USA.
  3. Junior Research Group for Primate Sexual Selection , German Primate Center , Göttingen, Germany ; Courant Research Centre for the Evolution of Social Behaviour , Georg-August University , Göttingen, Germany.

PMID: 26064665 PMCID: PMC4453246 DOI: 10.1098/rsos.150109

Abstract

Many species use facial features to identify conspecifics, which is necessary to navigate a complex social environment. The fundamental mechanisms underlying face processing are starting to be well understood in a variety of primate species. However, most studies focus on a limited subset of species tested with unfamiliar faces. As well as limiting our understanding of how widely distributed across species these skills are, this also limits our understanding of how primates process faces of individuals they know, and whether social factors (e.g. dominance and social bonds) influence how readily they recognize others. In this study, socially housed crested macaques voluntarily participated in a series of computerized matching-to-sample tasks investigating their ability to discriminate (i) unfamiliar individuals and (ii) members of their own social group. The macaques performed above chance on all tasks. Familiar faces were not easier to discriminate than unfamiliar faces. However, the subjects were better at discriminating higher ranking familiar individuals, but not unfamiliar ones. This suggests that our subjects applied their knowledge of their dominance hierarchies to the pictorial representation of their group mates. Faces of high-ranking individuals garner more social attention, and therefore might be more deeply encoded than other individuals. Our results extend the study of face recognition to a novel species, and consequently provide valuable data for future comparative studies.

Keywords: crested macaques; dominance; familiarity; individual recognition; matching-to-sample; social bond

References

  1. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010 Jan 12;107(2):519-20 - PubMed
  2. Anim Cogn. 2012 May;15(3):401-7 - PubMed
  3. PLoS One. 2013 Nov 06;8(11):e78308 - PubMed
  4. Neuropsychologia. 2007 Jan 7;45(1):32-41 - PubMed
  5. Anim Behav. 2009 Jun;77(6):1507-1513 - PubMed
  6. Anim Cogn. 2013 May;16(3):445-58 - PubMed
  7. Am J Primatol. 2013 Apr;75(4):361-75 - PubMed
  8. J Comp Psychol. 2000 Mar;114(1):47-60 - PubMed
  9. Bioessays. 2008 Mar;30(3):212-25 - PubMed
  10. Proc Biol Sci. 2012 Oct 7;279(1744):4042-50 - PubMed
  11. Dev Sci. 2010 Nov;13(6):913-22 - PubMed
  12. J Comp Psychol. 2010 Feb;124(1):57-65 - PubMed
  13. Am J Primatol. 2012 Sep;74(9):828-40 - PubMed
  14. Primates. 1994 Jul;35(3):343-51 - PubMed
  15. Zoo Biol. 2008 Nov;27(6):470-87 - PubMed
  16. J Comp Psychol. 2013 May;127(2):212-25 - PubMed
  17. Anim Cogn. 2015 Jul;18(4):985-90 - PubMed
  18. Behav Res Methods. 2010 May;42(2):507-16 - PubMed
  19. Proc Biol Sci. 2006 Mar 22;273(1587):707-12 - PubMed
  20. Behav Res Methods. 2009 May;41(2):396-404 - PubMed
  21. J Comp Psychol. 2003 Dec;117(4):400-5 - PubMed
  22. Folia Primatol (Basel). 2009;80(3):220-32 - PubMed
  23. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009 Dec 22;106(51):21539-43 - PubMed
  24. Science. 2003 Nov 14;302(5648):1234-6 - PubMed
  25. Behav Processes. 1998 Feb;42(2-3):87-99 - PubMed
  26. Br J Psychol. 2011 Nov;102(4):726-47 - PubMed
  27. J Comp Psychol. 2010 Aug;124(3):233-51 - PubMed
  28. Memory. 2009 Jul;17(5):577-96 - PubMed
  29. Curr Biol. 2007 Apr 3;17(7):619-23 - PubMed
  30. Curr Biol. 2006 Feb 21;16(4):R119-20 - PubMed
  31. PLoS One. 2012;7(4):e34505 - PubMed
  32. Perception. 2011;40(7):863-72 - PubMed
  33. Am J Primatol. 2013 Jul;75(7):763-73 - PubMed
  34. PLoS One. 2012;7(9):e44680 - PubMed
  35. Curr Biol. 2005 Mar 29;15(6):543-8 - PubMed
  36. PLoS One. 2011;6(8):e23345 - PubMed
  37. Cogn Neuropsychol. 2000 Feb 1;17(1):55-71 - PubMed
  38. Trends Cogn Sci. 2000 Sep;4(9):330-337 - PubMed
  39. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 2011 Jan;65(1):47-55 - PubMed
  40. Science. 1966 Jul 29;153(3735):501-6 - PubMed
  41. Anim Cogn. 2010 Nov;13(6):835-48 - PubMed
  42. J Comp Psychol. 2008 Nov;122(4):390-402 - PubMed
  43. Front Psychol. 2013 Jan 31;4:11 - PubMed
  44. Primates. 2003 Jul;44(3):225-30 - PubMed
  45. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 2002 Oct;28(4):358-68 - PubMed
  46. J Comp Psychol. 2009 May;123(2):151-60 - PubMed
  47. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2011 Jun 12;366(1571):1764-77 - PubMed
  48. Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2009 Feb;19(1):45-51 - PubMed

Publication Types