No idea.How often have the chimps, animals under continuous study, performed this task before when compared to college kids asked to volunteer?
bolding mineThey saw nine numbers displayed on a computer screen. When they touched the first number, the other eight turned into white squares. The test was to touch all these squares in the order of the numbers that used to be there.
Results showed that the chimps, while no more accurate than the people, could do this faster.
One chimp, Ayumu, did the best. Researchers included him and nine college students in a second test.
This time, five numbers flashed on the screen only briefly before they were replaced by white squares. The challenge, again, was to touch these squares in the proper sequence.
When the numbers were displayed for about seven-tenths of a second, Ayumu and the college students were both able to do this correctly about 80 percent of the time.
But when the numbers were displayed for just four-tenths or two-tenths of a second, the chimp was the champ. The briefer of those times is too short to allow a look around the screen, and in those tests Ayumu still scored about 80 percent, while humans plunged to 40 percent.
That indicates Ayumu was better at taking in the whole pattern of numbers at a glance, the researchers wrote.
Looks like the test does not in fact show memory superiority, but shows that the chimp's eyes/brain can input data more efficiently? Kind of like how cats have a better sense of smell and dogs have a better sense of hearing?
It could be, or it could be superior memory in some sense -- who knows. It would take many more experiments of various types to reach a conclusion here.
I think that in general what surprises people is that the task in the test is the kind of thing people would assume we are automatically better at than any other animal.
This is just another test, among many, that narrows the mental differences between us and our ancestors. Most of us should find it fascinating and exciting. The creationists and the animal testing proponents should find it threatening.
We don't have access to the experimental deisgn. I suspect that the chimp may be practiced at the task, while the humans involved are all new to it.
I would bet money on it. It is still impressive, though.
Indeed.Freethinker said:To truly compare, both the symbols and the order should be arbitrary and meaningless.
If the chimp has practice and the humans don't then a comparison between them is invalid. You can't draw inferences without a control.
Apparently everyone practised: "Even with six months of training, three students failed to catch up to the three young chimps, Matsuzawa said in an e-mail." (quoted from the article linked from the OP).
My first thought is that there is a flaw in the design of the experiment. The numerals themselves have more "baggage" to the human volunteers which might slow them down, and the humans no doubt know the correct order better than the chimps, which could make them faster. To truly compare, both the symbols and the order should be arbitrary and meaningless.