Tools and other utilitarian artifacts pervade humans’ lives. They have played such a pivotal role in theories of human evolution that tool use has traditionally been considered a behavioral indicator of complex and flexible cognition. While this early promise has long triggered and maintained keen scientific interest for the study of tool use in nonhuman animals, it may also have revived some naïve anthropomorphic and even anthropocentric biases, particularly when studying species that are evolutionarily close to humans. It is noteworthy that not all cases of tool use necessarily imply high levels of cognitive sophistication, and we should not automatically attribute some of our psychological characteristics to other tool-using species, just because tools are part of our human identity. In fact, tool use is a broad functional category of...
- Bernstein, N. A. (1996). Dexterity and its development. London, UK: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
- Fragaszy, D. M., Visalberghi, E., & Fedigan, L. M. (2004). The complete capuchin: The biology of the genus Cebus. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
- Root-Bernstein, M., Narayan, T., Cornier, L., & Bourgeois, A. (2019). Context-specific tool use by Sus cebifrons. Mammalian Biology, 98, 102–110.Google Scholar
- Shumaker, R. W., Walkup, K. R., & Beck, B. B. (2011). Animal tool behavior: The use and manufacture of tools by animals. Baltimore: JHU Press.Google Scholar
- Thierry, B., Anderson, J. R., Demaria, C., Desportes, C., & Petit, O. (1994). Tonkean macaque behavior from the perspective of the evolution of Sulawesi macaques. In J. J. Roeder, B. Thierry, J. R. Anderson, & N. Herrenschmidt (Eds.), Current primatology (Social development, learning and behavior, Vol. II, pp. 103–117). Strasbourg: Université Louis Pasteur.Google Scholar