Orangutan Picks Cocktail by Seeing Ingredients

An orangutan matched researchers' predictions about which mixed beverage he would choose based on his relative fondness for the separate ingredients.

 

DigitalStock (MARS)

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Imagine you had never tasted lemonade. You would still probably assume that lemon juice mixed with sugar tastes better than lemon juice alone. Because you know what lemons taste like, and you know what sugar tastes like.

You can recall those past experiences, and make a prediction about your response to something new. Researchers call the ability to predict our future emotional state "affective forecasting." And some have suggested that the skill is unique to humans. But is it?

"We combined different liquids and asked participants, the orangutan and the humans, to predict how such novel liquid combinations taste like, and whether they prefer one or the other." Lund University cognitive scientist Gabriela-Alina Sauciuc.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


She and her colleagues offered their cocktails to a 21-year-old male Sumatran orangutan named Naong, who lives in Sweden's Furuvik Zoo. They used four ingredients—cherry juice, rhubarb juice, lemon juice, and diluted apple cider vinegar—which they combined into six unfamiliar mixtures. Altogether, that made for 24 possible comparisons of one drink against another.

Naong watched the researchers mix his drinks. Then he got to choose from the two set before him. And in 21 of the 24 trials, Naong matched the researchers’ predictions: that his choice would be based on his relative fondness for the separate ingredients.  [Gabriela-Alina Sauciuc, et al., Affective forecasting in an orangutan: predicting the hedonic outcome of novel juice mixes, in Animal Cognition]

For example, since he liked rhubarb juice better than lemon juice, he also preferred rhubarb-cherry juice to lemon-cherry juice—despite having had no experience with either.

"We were impressed with Naong's ability to be so consistent in his choices."

From a statistical perspective, the orangutan data was indistinguishable from human data. Both species seemed to make consistent choices about future events even if they had no prior experience to guide their decision-making.

"An ability which was previously thought to be uniquely human presumably has evolved earlier, so that it's shared with orangutans and presumably with chimpanzees as well."

It’s a single study with a single orangutan. But it may be that we will soon mark yet another skill off the list of things that were once thought to be the sole domain of our species. Perhaps what's truly unique about us is our ongoing quest to find something unique about us.  

—Jason G. Goldman

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

Jason G. Goldman is a science journalist based in Los Angeles. He has written about animal behavior, wildlife biology, conservation, and ecology for Scientific American, Los Angeles magazine, the Washington Post, the Guardian, the BBC, Conservation magazine, and elsewhere. He contributes to Scientific American's "60-Second Science" podcast, and is co-editor of Science Blogging: The Essential Guide (Yale University Press). He enjoys sharing his wildlife knowledge on television and on the radio, and often speaks to the public about wildlife and science communication.

More by Jason G. Goldman

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe