The uniquely human capacity to throw evolved from a non-throwing primate: an evolutionary dissociation between action and perception
Abstract
Humans are uniquely endowed with the ability to engage in accurate, high-momentum throwing. Underlying this ability is a unique morphological adaptation that enables the characteristic rotation of the arm and pelvis. What is unknown is whether the psychological mechanisms that accompany the act of throwing are also uniquely human. Here we explore this problem by asking whether free-ranging rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta), which lack both the morphological and neural structures to throw, nonetheless recognize the functional properties of throwing. Rhesus not only understand that human throwing represents a threat, but that some aspects of a throwing event are more relevant than others; specifically, rhesus are sensitive to the kinematics, direction and speed of the rotating arm, the direction of the thrower's eye gaze and the object thrown. These results suggest that the capacity to throw did not coevolve with psychological mechanisms that accompany throwing; rather, this capacity may have built upon pre-existing perceptual processes. These results are consistent with a growing body of work showing that non-human animals often exhibit perceptual competencies that do not show up in their motor responses, suggesting evolutionary dissociations between the systems of perception that provide understanding of the world and those that mediate action on the world.
References
Bingham P.M . 1999Human uniqueness: a general theory. Q. Rev. Biol. 74, 133–169.doi:10.1086/393069. Crossref, ISI, Google ScholarBrannon E.M& Terrace H.S . 1998Ordering of the numerosities 1–9 by monkeys. Science. 282, 746–749.doi:10.1126/science.282.5389.746. Crossref, PubMed, ISI, Google ScholarBuccino G, Lui F, Canessa N, Patteri I, Lagravinese G, Benuzzi F, Porro C.A& Rizzolatti G . 2004Neural circuits involved in the recognition of actions performed by non-conspecifics: an fMRI study. J. Cognit. Neurosci. 16, 114–126.doi:10.1162/089892904322755601. Crossref, PubMed, ISI, Google ScholarFerrari P.F, Rozzi S& Fogassi L . 2005Mirror neurons responding to observation of actions made with tools in monkey ventral premotor cortex. J. Cognit. Neurosci. 17, 212–226.doi:10.1162/0898929053124910. Crossref, PubMed, ISI, Google ScholarHauser M.D, Chomsky N& Fitch W.T . 2002The faculty of language: what is it, who has it, and how did it evolve?. Science. 298, 1569–1579.doi:10.1126/science.298.5598.1569. Crossref, PubMed, ISI, Google ScholarMilner A.D& Goodale M.A . 2006The visual brain in action. 2nd edn.Oxford, UK:Oxford University Press. Google ScholarNewport E.L, Hauser M.D, Spaepen G& Aslin R.N . 2004Learning at a distance: II. Statistical learning of non-adjacent dependencies in a nonhuman primate. Cognit. Psychol. 49, 85–117.doi:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2003.12.002. Crossref, PubMed, ISI, Google ScholarRizzolatti G& Craighero L . 2004The mirror–neuron System. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 27, 169–192.doi:10.1146/annurev.neuro.27.070203.144230. Crossref, PubMed, ISI, Google ScholarSchiff W, Caviness J.A& Gibson J.J . 1962Persistent fear responses in rhesus monkeys to the optical stimulus of “looming”. Science. 136, 982–963.doi:10.1126/science.136.3520.982. Crossref, PubMed, ISI, Google ScholarWalk R.D, Gibson E.J& Tighe T.J . 1957Behavior of light- and dark-reared rats on a visual cliff. Science. 126, 80–81.doi:10.1126/science.126.3263.80-a. Crossref, PubMed, ISI, Google Scholar
Figure 1 is now presented in the correct form. 26 February 2007
