Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1893/23627
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorWilson, Duncan Aen_UK
dc.contributor.authorTomonaga, Masakien_UK
dc.contributor.authorVick, Sarah-Janeen_UK
dc.date.accessioned2016-08-20T01:01:44Z-
dc.date.available2016-08-20T01:01:44Zen_UK
dc.date.issued2016-07en_UK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1893/23627-
dc.description.abstractThis study explored whether capuchin monkey eye preferences differ systematically in response to stimuli of positive and negative valence. The ‘valence hypothesis’ proposes that the right hemisphere is more dominant for negative emotional processing and the left hemisphere is more dominant for positive emotional processing. Visual information from each eye is thought to be transferred faster to and primarily processed by the contralateral cerebral hemisphere. Therefore, it was predicted capuchin monkeys would show greater left eye use for looking at negative stimuli and greater right eye use for looking at positive stimuli. Eleven captive capuchin monkeys were presented with four images of different emotional valence (an egg and capuchin monkey raised eyebrow face were categorised as positive, and a harpy eagle face and capuchin monkey threat face were categorised as negative) and social relevance (consisting of capuchin monkey faces or not), and eye preferences for viewing the stimuli through a monocular viewing hole were recorded. While strong preferences for using either the left or right eye were found for most individuals, there was no consensus at the population level. Furthermore, the direction of looking, number of looks and duration of looks did not differ significantly with the emotional valence of the stimuli. These results are inconsistent with the main hypotheses about the relationship between eye preferences and processing of emotional stimuli. However, the monkeys did show significantly more arousal behaviours (vocalisation, door-touching, self-scratching and hand-rubbing) when viewing the negatively valenced stimuli than the positively valenced stimuli, indicating that the stimuli were emotionally salient. These findings do not provide evidence for a relationship between eye preferences and functional hemispheric specialisations, as often proposed in humans. Additional comparative studies are required to better understand the phylogeny of lateral biases, particularly in relation to emotional valence.en_UK
dc.language.isoenen_UK
dc.publisherSpringeren_UK
dc.relationWilson DA, Tomonaga M & Vick S (2016) Eye preferences in capuchin monkeys (Sapajus apella). Primates, 57 (3), pp. 433-440. http://link.springer.com/journal/10329; https://doi.org/10.1007/s10329-016-0537-zen_UK
dc.rightsThis item has been embargoed for a period. During the embargo please use the Request a Copy feature at the foot of the Repository record to request a copy directly from the author. You can only request a copy if you wish to use this work for your own research or private study. Publisher policy allows this work to be made available in this repository; Published in Primates, July 2016, Volume 57, Issue 3, pp 433–440 by Springer. The final publication is available at Springer via http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10329-016-0537-zen_UK
dc.subjectEye preferencesen_UK
dc.subjectBehavioural lateralityen_UK
dc.subjectHemispheric specialisationsen_UK
dc.subjectEmotionen_UK
dc.subjectCapuchin monkeysen_UK
dc.titleEye preferences in capuchin monkeys (Sapajus apella)en_UK
dc.typeJournal Articleen_UK
dc.rights.embargodate2017-04-16en_UK
dc.rights.embargoreason[Wilson et al 2016.pdf] Publisher requires embargo of 12 months after formal publication.en_UK
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s10329-016-0537-zen_UK
dc.identifier.pmid27083927en_UK
dc.citation.jtitlePrimatesen_UK
dc.citation.issn1610-7365en_UK
dc.citation.issn0032-8332en_UK
dc.citation.volume57en_UK
dc.citation.issue3en_UK
dc.citation.spage433en_UK
dc.citation.epage440en_UK
dc.citation.publicationstatusPublisheden_UK
dc.citation.peerreviewedRefereeden_UK
dc.type.statusAM - Accepted Manuscripten_UK
dc.identifier.urlhttp://link.springer.com/journal/10329en_UK
dc.author.emailsv2@stir.ac.uken_UK
dc.citation.date15/04/2016en_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationKyoto Universityen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationKyoto Universityen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationPsychologyen_UK
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000379192900020en_UK
dc.identifier.scopusid2-s2.0-84963785847en_UK
dc.identifier.wtid562818en_UK
dc.contributor.orcid0000-0001-8741-9653en_UK
dc.date.accepted2016-04-05en_UK
dc.date.filedepositdate2016-06-30en_UK
Appears in Collections:Psychology Journal Articles

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Wilson et al 2016.pdfFulltext - Accepted Version1.17 MBAdobe PDFView/Open


This item is protected by original copyright



Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact library@stir.ac.uk providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.