July 20, 2015

July 20, 2015

Written by Maximus Peperkamp, M.S. Verbal Engineer

Dear Reader, 

 

This is the thirteenth writing which includes findings that were reported by the animal researchers Owren and Rendall in their paper “An affect conditioning model of nonhuman primate vocal signaling” (1997).

I began to read this paper again just to make sure that I didn’t miss anything. In primate as well as in human vocalization “if the sender is dominant to the receiver” the sender has “ample opportunity to pair negative calls with negative outcomes” and “can routinely induce and subsequently elicit conditioned affective responses.” 

These conditioned autonomic responses of the receiver are adaptive as the  receiver has learned to respond appropriately to “individually distinct vocalizations prior to attacking or otherwise frightening another animal.” Since “the identity of the sender is the most important predictor of upcoming events” this animal’s “individually distinctive acoustic cues play a primary role in mediating any conditioning that occurs.” 

How a dominant person sounds has an immediate physiological effect on the subordinate receiver, who recognizes the “salient, discrete cues to individual identity.” The vocalizations which are called “sonants and gruffs” by the authors, map directly onto human Sound Verbal Behavior (SVB).

Interestingly, “sonants and gruffs” can be used by both dominant ones  as well as subordinates “in order to elicit positive conditioned responses”.  A dominant primate produces these vocalizations to let the subordinate know that there is no need to be afraid because he or she only wants grooming. The subordinate one “should pair such calls with grooming or other positive outcomes when interacting with a dominant, thereby being able to elicit positive conditioned responses in that individual on other occasions.”