Savage-Rumbaugh
et al (1986)
“Spontaneous symbol acquisition and communicative
use by pygmy chimpanzees”
Lesson 1 – Background & Context
Starter
“Furious green ideas sleep peacefully”:
 does the sentence make sense?
 is the sentence grammatical?
 how did you make these decisions?
Learning Objective
At the end of this lesson you should be
able to:
- describe the nature-nurture debate
regarding language development
Language vs Communication
- Can animals communicate (with one another / with us?)
- Do animals have language?
Language is a system of symbols (words / sounds) which convey
meaning.
Communication is the transmission of ‘something’ (a message,
signal) from one location to another.
Some form of language is necessary for communication.
Linguistic universals are present in all languages.
COMPONENTS
OF
LANGUAGE
PHONOLOGY
(sound
patterns)
SEMANTICS
(meaning
patterns)
GRAMMAR
(rules of
language)
PRAGMATICS
(rules of
effective
communication)
Children’s Language Development
Work out the time-line for language development.
 2 mths – cooing (pre-linguistic)
 6 mths – reduplicated babbling (‘dadada’)
 12 mths – one-word utterances
 18-24 mths – two-word utterances (telegraphic speech)
 3 yrs – vocabulary of @1000 words; use of personal pronoun
 6-7 yrs – rules of grammar are mastered
Language comprehension develops before language production.
Children’s Language Development
Was this time-line true:
- for you
- your siblings
Some exceptions / anomalies:
 language disorders:
- dyslexia
- (selective) mutism
 autism
 individual / gender differences
Nature-Nurture Debate
Nurture View
(Skinner,
1957)
 language
(Behaviourism)
is
Nature View
(Chomsky,
1965)
learnt…  language is innate / biologically
pre-programmed…
 through principles of Operant  and is acquired through the
Conditioning (reinforcement or existence of an innate processing
punishment
to
increase
or box (LAD)
decrease behaviour)
 child will repeat sounds which  critical period (birth – puberty)
have been positively reinforced
 implies primates have capacity  implies primates should show no
for learning language
ability for language
• Explain the nature and nurture debate using
Skinner and Chomsky
What makes us human?
What do you think are the main differences
between primates and humans?
Are there any similarities?
Some differences
Humans have:
• a theory of mind (‘Sally-Anne task’)
• consciousness / self-awareness
• the ability for tool use
• language ability
• high levels of intelligence
• less instinctive behaviour
Some similarities
• Living as part of a group
• Genetic material (98%)
But what about this?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4s0jt8L5
V_w
And this?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQCOHUXmEZg
Earlier Research on Primates
Name of Chimp
(researchers)
Main Findings
Gua
(Kellogg & Kellogg, 1933)
 Gua raised with researchers own
child (Donald) but never uttered a
word.
Vicki
(Hayes & Hayes, 1952)
 Vicki learnt 4 words in six
years: up, cup, mama & papa.
Washoe
(Gardner & Gardner, 1969)
 Using ASL, Washoe learnt 30
signs over a 22 month period
 some creativity (“Gimme tickle”)
 but no structure dependence
Nim Chimpsky
(Terrace)
 Using ASL, Nim learnt 125 signs
over a 4yr period – but was he
just imitating his teachers?
Gardner & Gardner (Washoe)
• A case study
• Participant - a female chimp
• Age - approx I year old
• Procedure - Washoe lived in a caravan in
the Gardner’s garden & was taught
American Sign Language (ASL)
Washoe’s progress ...
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
First SINGLE WORDS
come, gimme, hurry, sweet, tickle
34 after 21 months
by 4 years over 100 signs
YES – SEMANTICITY (meaning)
signed TOOTHBRUSH in bathroom
signed FLOWER in garden and when shown
picture of flower
Washoe’s progress ...
• YES - CREATIVITY
• Washoe spontaneously used
combinations of signs
• GIMME TICKLE - come and tickle me
• OPEN FOOD DRINK - open the fridge
• LISTEN EAT - listen to the dinner gong
• GO SWEET - take me to the raspberry
bushes
Washoe’s progress ...
• NO STRUCTURE DEPENDENCE
• English children usually put the SUBJECT
before the ACTION
• Mummy come
• Eve read
• Car gone
• Washoe did not seem to do this
• GO SWEET or SWEET GO both used for
take me to the raspberry bushes
Plenary
Three things you’ve learnt today.
Savage-Rumbaugh
et al (1986)
“Spontaneous symbol acquisition and communicative
use by pygmy chimpanzees”
Lesson 2 – The Core Study
Learning Objective
At the end of this lesson you should be
able to:
- describe the key features of SavageRumbaugh et al’s study into ape
language
Aim of Study
To study the language acquisition (specifically,
comprehension) of two bonobo (or pygmy)
chimps (Kanzi & Mulika) and draw comparisons
with that of two common chimps (Austin &
Sherman) who had been previously studied.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QBlDGX95ey
s (I will tweet the other parts to this!)
Method:
• case study, using
• longitudinal design (17 month period) with
observation
Sample:
• 4 great apes; focus on Kanzi (male pygmy
chimp) – study began when aged 2:6yrs and
separated from his mother; born in
captivity.
Apparatus:
• Lexigram board – made up of symbols used to stand
for words; these symbols brighten up when touched
(256 keys).
• Note: each lexigram did not look like the object or
word it stood for.
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kwm4FEB9LC8
Savage-Rumbaugh et al (1986)
The visual symbol system
• Indoors: battery powered keyboard with
geometric symbols that brighten when
touched, then speech synthesiser ‘speaks’ the
word
• Outdoors: copy of keyboard
as laminated pointing board
• each symbol called a lexigram
Savage-Rumbaugh et al (1986)
Kanzi’s outdoor environment
• 55 acres forest; 17 food locations; must travel to ‘get
food’ each location for a specific food type e.g.
bananas to treehouse, peaches to lookout
• Kanzi learned where all the food was located
• could select a food from photos on the ground and
could guide another person to his chosen location
• learned to use the symbols on the keyboard to
indicate where he wanted to go
Savage-Rumbaugh et al (1986)
Longitudinal case study - data collection
• records kept of Kanzi’s language
development (symbol use) for 17 months
• from the age of 2 1/2
• computerised records from keyboard
• notes from observers when outside
Savage-Rumbaugh et al (1986)
Longitudinal case study
The data (assessing Kanzi’s symbol use)
• correct or incorrect
• spontaneous
• imitation
• structured (e.g. responds to question)
• also behavioural concordance (agreement)
• e.g. if request to ‘go to treehouse’ led a person to the
treehouse
Procedure:
• bonobos lived at the Language Research Centre (had human
companions who also used ASL and spoken English)
• exposed to lexigram keyboard – which eventually consisted of
256 keys
• Kanzi & Mulika learned through observation (mother was
Matata) – no formal training provided to chimps
• all utterances were recorded and coded:
- correct / incorrect
- spontaneous / imitated / structured
• criteria for learning of symbol:
- behavioural concordance measure (what Kanzi said had to
match up with what he did)
• tests consisted of:
- ‘blind’ test in forest (with person unconnected with training)
- matching photo to lexigram symbol
- matching photo to spoken English
- matching lexigram symbol to spoken English
Results 1:
• Greater use of specific and untutored gestures by
K&M
• Early referential use of lexigrams (M at 12mths)
• Symbol acquisition: K = 44; M = 37 lexigrams
• ‘Blind test’ in forest – K able to lead experimenter
out of forest by correctly using photos and
lexigrams
Results 2:
• 80% of K’s utterances were spontaneous
• Use of combinations (multiple symbols) – 2,500+
correct and mostly about initiating games
D
A
B
F
Results 3: Formal Vocabulary Tests
Show me the tomato
lexigram
Primate
•
Number correct / total
Matching symbol
to English
Matching photo
to English
Matching photo
to symbol
K
65/66
56/59
55/59
M
41/42
36/41
41/42
A
Not tested
3/30
30/30
S
Not tested
2/30
30/30
Bonobos can understand spoken English whereas common chimps cannot
Conclusions from Study
• Compared to other species of chimp, pygmy
chimps appear to be able to learn and use
language more like a human child.
• Shows role of nurture (culture learning).
Savage-Rumbaugh
et al (1986)
“Spontaneous symbol acquisition and communicative
use by pygmy chimpanzees”
Lesson 3 – Evaluation & Extension
Thinking Skills
Evaluation
Synthesis
Analysis
Application
Implications, Applications
& Changes
Strengths & Weaknesses of
Savage-Rumbaugh et al’s study
Issues & Debates
Results & Conclusions
Understanding
Methods
Background & Context
Knowledge
Approach (Cognitive)
Issues & Debates
Issues
Debates
Methodology
Determinism vs Free will
Ethics
Nature-nurture
Ecological Validity
Reductionism vs Holism
Longitudinal vs Snapshot
Ethnocentrism
Qualitative vs Quantitative Data
Psychology as science
Approaches
Individual / Situational explanations
Perspectives
Usefulness
Which of the above issues / debates are
raised by the Savage-Rumbaugh study?
Evaluating Savage-Rumbaugh
STRENGTHS
WEAKNESSES
Savage-Rumbaugh et al (1986)
CONTROL
• analysis of videotape against real time coding
of symbol use by 2 observers
• 1 scored real time, 1 scored tape, real time
observer did not know the record would be
used for reliability check
• 100% agreement on correct vs incorrect use of
symbols
• 1 disagreement over spontaneous use
Evaluation in more detail
• The research method could be described as
a longitudinal case study and therefore
allows in depth data to be collected and
allows development to be studied over
time.
• For example, every utterance made by
Kanzi was documented by the researchers
over a 17 month period.
Evaluation in more detail
• It is also possible to argue that the study
was high in ecological validity as Kanzi
and the researchers could roam from place
to place around the 55 acre site.
• However the ecological validity can also be
questioned as the subjects were not reared
in their natural environment.
Evaluation in more detail
• The data was gathered under rigorous
controls such as the formal tests and are
therefore are less likely to be open to bias
and subjectivity.
• This improves both reliability and validity.
• Similarly the data gathered were
quantitative allowing for analysis and
comparisons between chimpanzees to be
made.
• Qualitative data were also collected which
improves the richness of the study.
Evaluation in more detail
• It is possible to criticise the ethical nature
of this study.
• Is it necessary to study chimpanzees in a
human environment and to test their
language skills in such a formal way?
• Note though that the normal ethical
guidelines do not apply to non human
animals.
Evaluation in more detail
• The researchers did note that they were
generalising from a very small sample of
chimpanzees and a study of more subjects
would have to be carried out for the study
to be more representative.
• Many researchers still doubt whether Kanzi
and Mulika were using language in the
complex way that humans do
Ways of Investigating Language
 primate studies using alternative apparatus / methods:
- American Sign Language (ASL)
- plastic tokens
- brain-scanning technology
 longitudinal studies of ‘normal’ humans from birth
 studies of children raised by deaf parents (p136)
 quasi-experiments / case studies of feral children
- Genie
- Czech twins
http://www.feralchildren.com/en/index.php
And finally…

Let’s consider the issues raised by animal research:
- ethics (of separation)
- rights of animals – ‘Great Ape Project’
http://www.greatapeproject.org/
Further Resources
• Orgininal article (Savage-Rumbaugh)
• Journal article: ‘’Monkey Business: primates & language”
• Website: http://www.iowagreatapes.org/bonobo/meet/kanzi.php#
• Book: Primate Psychology - Chapter 14 (Language)