All Episodes
Previous Next
Plain Text
July 3, 2018 - Skeptoid
18:10
Skeptoid #630: The Apes Who Learned Sign Language

Although many regard Koko as an ape who used sign language, science tells us that ability probably doesn't exist. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|

Time Text
The Myth of Signing Apes 00:07:38
Our genetic cousins, like chimps and gorillas, are so similar to us that sometimes it seems like they could open their mouth and start engaging in conversation.
So many of us are thrilled to have learned that a few have been taught sign language.
Thus, their human friends are gifted with that rare privilege of having intelligent conversation with a member of another species.
Well, how would you feel if this all turned out to be completely fake?
The apes who learned sign language are coming right up on Skeptoid.
A quick reminder for everyone, you're listening to Skeptoid, revealing the true science and true history behind urban legends every week since 2006.
With over a thousand episodes, we're celebrating 20 years of keeping it focused and keeping it brief.
And we couldn't have done it without your curiosity leading the way.
And now we're even offering a little bit more.
If you become a premium member, supporting the show with a monthly micropayment of as little as $5, you get more Skeptoid.
The premium version of the show is not only ad-free, it has extended content.
These episodes are a few minutes longer.
We get rid of the ads and we'll replace them with more Skeptoid.
The Extended Premium Show available now.
Come to Skeptoid.com and click Go Premium.
You're listening to Skeptoid.
I'm Brian Dunning from Skeptoid.com.
The Apes Who Learned Sign Language In June of 2018, the famous gorilla Coco died of natural causes.
Coco had become famous around the world for her incredible ability to speak in sign language.
Coco wrote books.
She raised kittens.
Coco developed friendships with visiting celebrities.
Coco would tell jokes and be silly.
Coco would hear things on the news, feel sad, and express her sadness, all using sign language.
But it turns out that the field of ape linguistics has virtually evaporated.
What evidence there is that apes might have been able to sign comes to us not from the academic literature, but only from the mass media.
Feel-good stories written for the people, apparently devoid of much scientific validity.
Today we're going to point our skeptical eye at the field of apes who speak in sign language.
Here's the first thing that suggests not all is as it seems in the world of signing apes.
If it works and the ability to communicate with us can be instilled into apes, then why aren't there signing apes everywhere?
Why don't we teach it to all of them?
Indeed, why don't ape parents teach it to their own young?
If apes had any meaningful ability to communicate at even a rudimentary level using sign language, you'd think many of those who interact with humans would do so.
They would tell their zookeepers what they want, probably to be set free.
They would accompany primatologists on expeditions and translate between the scientists and the native apes.
Every animal research institution would have signing apes, and everyone in the world with a degree in primatology would have experience communicating with them.
After all these decades, we'd have a deep understanding of ape communication and their thought processes.
Signing with apes would be commonplace and widespread.
But none of these things has happened.
Not one of them.
Not only did signing apes never become common, the number of research programs studying ape signing has gone from a few to even fewer.
At its peak in the 1970s, the field of teaching apes to communicate with humans never had more active research programs than you could count on your fingers and toes.
Today, there is not even a single program anywhere in the world making publishable claims.
Backwards is not where promising directions in research tend to go.
In every field of science, when we see researchers abandoning projects, the reason nearly always tends to be that the project was a dead end.
Most histories of human-ape communication cite the work of Herbert Terris as the moment the field became a dead end.
Terrace was inspired by the case of a chimpanzee named Washo, raised from infancy as a human child by Alan and Beatrix Gardner, a married couple of University of Nevada researchers.
Accounts vary depending on whose you read, but Washo is said to have learned anywhere from 100 to 350 signs.
Terrace wanted to do better, so his lab at Columbia University acquired a chimp and named him Nim Chimpsky, a play on the name of prominent linguist Noam Chomsky.
For a decade, Terrace raised Nim like a human child in a home environment, though unlike the gardeners with Washo, Nim was raised by multiple researchers in addition to Terrace.
In 1979, Terrace and his associates published a seminal paper in the journal Science, which became the trigger point for the subsequent decades of controversy over whether apes can actually use language.
Terrace's finding was that they could not.
He concluded, For the moment, our detailed investigation suggests that an ape's language learning is severely restricted.
Apes can learn many isolated symbols, as can dogs, horses, and other non-human species, but they show no unequivocal evidence of mastering the conversational, semantic, or syntactic organization of language.
The apes were using their symbol knowledge really only as a type of begging, when they wanted to play, eat, drink, or be tickled.
Little different than a dog pushing its bowl over to you with its nose when it is hungry.
Any claims grander than this, for example, of sentence structure or evidence of emotions or how the ape was feeling, were likely nothing more than self-deception on the part of researchers who would prompt their apes and over-interpret their responses.
The Gardners disagreed vehemently with Terrace.
Some ape researchers took their side, but the vast majority of scientists who viewed films of Washo, Nim, and other apes in similar programs and compared them to the linguistic data recorded by the researchers found that Terrace was right.
Apes weren't using the signs in any way that could be described as language.
They were using them to beg for whatever it was they wanted, using the communication method they were raised with, just like other domesticated animals.
More than a dozen similar research projects around the world fizzled out, none producing any better evidence that apes could communicate linguistically.
By the mid-1980s, there basically weren't any research projects left anywhere that were publishing data.
As a science, apes communicating via sign language was essentially dead.
Some programs used symbolic keyboards instead of sign language.
Skeptoid Files on Ape Language 00:02:25
The most notable example was a bonobo named Kanzi, who was studied by psychobiologists Duane and Sue Rumbaugh.
They published that Kanzi understood sentences, including semantics and syntax, and could carry out complex commands.
They filmed a demonstration in which Kanzi was given 660 complex commands, including some which depended on word order to truly test Kanzi's comprehension.
It sounded truly impressive.
In a world that can feel overwhelming, spreading thoughtful, evidence-based content is one of the best ways to make a positive impact.
Ask your local public radio station to air the Skeptoid Files, a 30-minute radio-friendly version of Skeptoid that pairs two related episodes promoting real science, true history, and critical thinking.
And in these challenging times for public media, we're offering these broadcasts for free to radio stations, available on the PRX Exchange or directly from Skeptoid Media.
It's an easy ask.
Just send a quick message to your station's programming director.
By helping to bring the Skeptoid files to the airwaves, you'll help promote the essential skills we all need to tell fact from fiction.
Just go to your local station's website, find the programming director's email address, or just their general email address.
You can even use the telephone.
I know that might sound crazy.
It's an old legacy device that allows real-time voice communication.
I know that's weird, but hey, it's an option.
The world can feel chaotic, but you're not powerless.
When you promote critical thinking, you can help your community tell fact from fiction.
And that's how we shape a better future.
In uncertain times, spreading good ideas can make you feel helpful, not helpless.
Let's stand up for reason, truth, and understanding together.
Get them to air the Skeptoid files from Skeptoid Media, available on the PRX Exchange, and they'll know what that is.
But animal behaviorist Dr. Clive Wynn from the University of Arizona took his own look at the film and compared what actually took place to the scores that were recorded.
And his report was abysmal.
Why Coco's Claims Fail 00:05:22
Commands often had to be repeated multiple times, and if Kanzi got even part of it right, for example, picking up the correct item but taking the wrong action with it, it was always scored as correct.
It became clear to me, he wrote, that their method of coding Kanzi's responses was unreasonably generous.
When he excluded all the false positives, Wynne found that Kanzi was correct no more than 30% of the time.
Like all the published accounts of apes using language, Kanzi's showed little promise that apes could do anything more than recognize symbols, the same way other animals do.
However, one ape's ability remained undiminished in the public's eye, that of Coco.
Coco, as practically any person on the street could tell you, was the gorilla who spoke in sign language.
Coco, so far as anyone believed, was living proof that apes have complex emotions, can think abstractly, and can hold intimate conversations with anyone using sign language.
Coco was the media darling of signing apes, the only one whose name was widely known, the one all the visiting celebrities would have their pictures taken with.
Robin Williams and Fred Rogers were two who notably spent time with Coco.
Videos of Williams playing with Coco are available online.
Coco was clearly gentle, lovable, and welcoming, truly a living teddy bear you couldn't help but love.
When she died of natural causes in June 2018, the worldwide media lamented her passing with tributes and obituaries, always referring to her as the gorilla who spoke in sign language.
But what's always been missing from Coco's story is experimental validity.
Fans of Coco's might note that they've never seen her on TV or in any of scores of YouTube videos speaking with anyone other than her handler, Dr. Penny Patterson, who does not publish research.
In the videos, it is not at all apparent that Coco pays very much attention at all to Patterson's commands, though Patterson is constantly laughing and commending Coco's successes.
As researchers discovered in the other ape research programs, Coco never initiated signing, but only responded to cueing from Patterson.
And even then, it typically only made sense when Patterson would interpret and explain what she said Coco actually meant.
Terrace's article also pointed out that 100% of the signs Coco made in a Nova television special on PBS were made immediately after Patterson made the sign first.
Other apes fared little better.
Analysis of a longer film of a chimp named Allie showed that 92% of Allie's signs were repeats of signs shown to him first by the teacher.
The most prominent example of Coco's language ability was in 1998 when she went live on an AOL chat with several thousand people.
Patterson signed for Coco and interpreted over the phone to the AOL chat editors.
Of about 25 responses that Coco made, only one seemed to have any relevance to the question.
She signed dog after Patterson asked if she'd like to have a kitty, dog, or gorilla as a friend.
All the other answers made no sense at all, though in most cases Patterson provided an explanation stating that it was what Coco meant.
Several times Coco begged for candy or juice, though in none of those instances was it relevant to the question.
Rather than being an impressive demonstration of interspecies communication, the AOL chat was a fairly stark example of unsuccessful attempts to cue and prompt the gorilla.
The probable reason for the dramatic failure of the AOL chat was described in a major investigative article by two science writers for the San Francisco Examiner, Kay Davidson and Janet Hopson, titled Gorilla Business.
They wrote, The consensus of numerous animal researchers the reporters contacted for an assessment of Penny Patterson's work is that over-interpretation of data and subtle cueing of the animal still plague the efforts and that the picture is clouded further by under-reporting in the scientific literature.
These negatives offset much of the good accomplished by the greater sensitivity toward apes Patterson's publicity engenders.
It is fair to point out that as disappointing as the published research has been, finding that apes' language abilities are severely limited, opposing claims made by many of the ape language researchers are just as passionate.
It is easy to find articles and videos, usually in consumer publications, arguing that apes like Coco experience and express complex emotions and have thorough understanding of the sign language they engage in.
By no means is the debate over ape language ability one-sided.
However, the science of that ability, regrettably, is.
Beyond Anthropomorphic Dreams 00:02:40
When we take the example of an animal as human-like and genial as Coco, one who has been known around the world and loved by so many people, it's hard not to over-anthropomorphize them.
We want to assign them human-like qualities, human-like abilities.
We want to form organic bonds with them.
We want Patterson's interpretation of random actions to mean that Coco is indeed communicating with us about something deeply moving.
We want to see ourselves in these wonderful animals, and often we don't stop to think whether what the animals actually are, stripped of our imposed anthropomorphism, might itself be sufficiently wonderful.
Don't forget Skeptoid is available in book form for all your friends and relatives who don't understand what a podcast is.
There are currently five books, each with 50 top episodes of the show adapted for print.
You can find them all online at amazon.com or Barnes ⁇ Noble.
Just search for Skeptoid.
Line your own shelves with a classy and colorful array of all five, or give the gift that anyone can sit down and enjoy.
No computery, handheldy thingamajig needed.
You're listening to Skeptoid, a listener-supported program.
I'm Brian Dunning from skeptoid.com.
Hello, everyone.
This is Adrienne Hill from Skookum Studios in Calgary, Canada, the land of maple syrup and moose.
And I'm here to ask you to consider becoming a premium member of Skeptoid for as little as $5 per month.
And that's only the cost of a couple of Tim Horton's double-doubles.
And that's Canadian for coffee with double cream and sugar.
Why support Skeptoid?
If you are like me and don't like ads, but like extended versions of each episode, Premium is for you.
If you want to support a worthwhile nonprofit that combats pseudoscience, promotes critical thinking, and provides free access to teachers to use the podcast in the classroom via the Teacher's Toolkit, then sign up today.
Remember that skepticism is the best medicine.
Next to giggling, of course.
Until next time, this is Adrienne Hill.
From PRX.
Export Selection