The fascinating life of the Russian psychologist Nadezhda Ladygina-Kohts.

Ladygina-Kohts and her chimpanzee Joni.

Today, we celebrate the 132th anniversary of the birth of the Russian psychologist and ethologist Nadezhda Nikolaevna Ladygina-Kohts. She was a pioneer in the study of nonhuman animal mind and her investigations demonstrated that cognition and empathy are non exclusively humans and she provided a method that is still in use in contemporary Psychology. This is her story: 

Nadezhda Ladygina-Kohts was born in Penza, Russia, on May 18, 1889. Her father was a music teacher and her mum did not have any formal education (Seel, 2012). She finished her study of comparative Psychology at Moscow University in 1917 and became head of the Laboratory of Zoopsychology of the Darwin Museum, which had been founded by her husband, the Russian zoologist Alexander F. Kohts ( Van Rosmalen et, al. 2011).

There, she studied the behaviour of monkeys and apes and published her findings in Russian, German and French. However, it was not until 2002 that her book “Infant Chimpanzee and Human Child” edited by Primatologist and professor in Psychology from Emory University, Frans de Waal, was translated to English.

The chimpanzee Joni.  

Ladygina-Kohts most famous feat was to raise the baby chimpanzee named Joni for years and compare the observations of his behaviour with those of her own son Rudi. These observations were published in the book “The chimpanzee child and the human child: their instincts, emotions, play habits and expressive movements”

One of the most important things that Ladygina-Kohts discovered during her observations with Joni was the existence of empathy without language. Every day, Ladygina-Kohts had to deal with his unruly behaviour. She found out that the only way to get Joni off the roof of her house was to appeal to his concern for her. In her book, Infant Chimpanzee and Human child, she wrote:

“If I pretend to be crying, close my eyes, and weep, Yoni immediately stops his plays or any other activities, quickly runs over to me, all excited and shagged, from the most remote places in the house, such as the roof or the ceiling of his cage, from where I could not drive him down despite my persistent calls and entreaties. He hastily runs around me, as if looking for the offender, looking at my face, he tenderly takes my chin in his palm, lightly touches my face with his finger, as though trying to understand what is happening” (De Waal, 2005, p.184).

In these photos, we can see different reactions of Joni towards Ladygina-Kohts’ emotions. Photos shared by Alexey Merkuryevich Gilyarov.

Ladygina-Kohts discovered that we do not need words or complex language in order to feel empathy for someone. A knowledge that is highly used among professionals in Ethology and Psychology nowadays.

Match-to-Sample Paradigm.

Nadia and Joni during one experiement. Darwin Museum Fund.

According to American psychologist Robert Yerkes, there is a good chance that Ladygina-Kohts invented the matching-to-sample (MTS) paradigm, which is widely used nowadays to help people with Autism Spectrum Disorder (De Waal, 2016).

Nadia (diminutive of Nadezhda) would hold up an object for Joni, then hide it among other objects in a sack and let him feel around to find the first one. The test involved two modalities, vision and touch, demanding that Joni make a choice based on his memory of the previously seen model (De Waal, p.97 2016).Interestingly, Ladygina’s studies were not limited to primates but also studied parrots.

In the photo below, which is part of the photographs at the Darwin Museum, we can see Nadia working with a macaw. The parrot sits opposite her on the table, while Ladygina-Kohts held a small food reward in one hand and a pencil in the other, scoring its choices as she tested its ability to discriminate among objects.

Ladygina-Koths working with a macaw. Photo shared by Olga Romanovna.

A smart strategy against the Lysenkoism.  

Nadia with her husband, the zoologist Aleksandr Kohts.

Ladygina-Kohts is also a great example of bravery. Because her experiments and her work at Darwin Museum with her husband, they were considered dangerous against the ideas of the most powerful Soviet politicians. Under the  influence of the would-be geneticist Trofim Lysenko (strong proponent of Lamarckism and author of pseudoscientific ideas termed Lysenkoism), Joseph Stalin had many a brilliant Russian biologist either shot or sent to the Gulag for thinking the wrong thoughts.

Lysenko believed that plants and animals pass on traits gained during their lifetime. The names of those who disagreed with him became unmentionable, and entire research institutes were closed down. Lysenko was distinctly ambivalent about Darwin’s theory, some of which he labeled “reactionary”. To stay away of trouble, Nadia and her husband hid documents and data among their taxidermy collection in the museum basement. Then, wisely put a large statue of the French biologist Jean Baptiste Lamarck at the museum entrance (De Waal, 2016).

Let’s not forget her legacy.

The Kohts Family. Aleksandr and Nadia with their son, Rudy.

Nadezhda Ladygina-Kohts was a pioneer of evolutionary cognition, is much beloved in her country and is widely recognized as the great scientist that she was (De Waal, 2016). However, a lot of people in Western nations studying Psychology still ignore her life and scientific contributions. Was Ladygina-Kohts overlooked by science due to her gender? Or was it her language? Or political censorship?

Frans de Waal, learnt about her by Robert Yerkes’ books, and I learnt about her by de Waal’s literature. I am not comparing myself with these two legends in Psychology and Primatology, but as an interesting fact, Nadezhda is a Slavic name which means “Hope”. Therefore, regardless of the reasons why her name is not well known in most Western faculties of Psychology, I hope with this article I can stimulate the curiosity of readers so they can learn more about the contributions of Ladygina-Kohts and give her the recognition that she deserves as a brave and brilliant scientist.

References.

De Waal, F. (2016). Are we smart enough to know how smart animals are?. W.W. Norton & Company.

De Waal, F. (2005) Our Inner Ape. Penguin Group.

Kohts, A.F. (1914) Ladygina-Kohts with chimpanzee Joni. [Photograph], Collections of the State Darwin Museum. http://foundations.nathist.ru/node/144678

Moscow Mayor Official website. (May, 2020). Meet Nadezhda Ladygina-Kohts: The first woman to study animal Psychology. https://www.mos.ru/en/news/item/74118073/

Najas (2011). Надежда Ладыгина-Котс и шимпанзе Иони (Nadezhda Ladygina-Kohts and the chimpanzee Joni) dreamwidth.org [Blog]. https://najas.dreamwidth.org/266165.html

Penza Oceanarium (2019). ФЛЭШМОБ К 130-ЛЕТНЕМУ ЮБИЛЕЮ НАДЕЖДЫ НИКОЛАЕВНЫ ЛАДЫГИНОЙ-КОТС. (Flashmob to the 130th anniversary of Nadezhda Ladygina-Kohts) http://oceanpenza.ru/2019/05/12/513/

Romanovna, O. (n/d). Nadezhda Ladygina-Kohts, the first Russian primatologist. antropogenez.ru. https://antropogenez.ru/article/1140/

Scientificrussia (2014) Думают ли животные? (Do animals think?). Scientificrussia.ru https://scientificrussia.ru/articles/copy-of-dumayut-li-zhivotnye

Seel, M. (2012). Encyclopedia of the sciences of learning. Springer US Publishing.

Timofeev, D. (2016, January 10) Опыты с шимпанзе, работы Надежды Николаевны Ладыгиной-Котс (Experiments with chimpanzees, works by Nadezhda Ladygina-Kohts) [YouTube Video] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKPuotJLvEo

Van Rosmelen, L., Van der Horst, F,. Van der Veer, R. (2011). An unexpected admirer of Ladygina-Kohts. History of Psychology, Vol.14. American Psychological Association.

Frans de Waal and our similarities with other primates.

Frans De Waal at Arnhem Zoo, 1979.

The contributions to Psychology from scientific fields such as Primatology are fundamental to understand more about our behaviour as human beings. Aggressiveness, mating, sexual promiscuity and social hierarchies are the most popular topics for students and professionals in Psychology interested in learn from Primatology.

However, every day we do other common activities that are usual as well in bonobos and chimpanzees. In this article, we are going to study the investigations of the primatologist Frans De Waal and discover some similarities that we share with other primates and how close we are with them.

French Kiss or Bonobo Kiss?

The French kiss is normal in humans during sexual intercourse and to show desire, trust and love for a partner. This form of kiss is common in other primates too, such as chimpanzees and bonobos. In fact, the French Kiss is the bonobo’s most recognizable, humanlike erotic act.

Whereas for chimpanzees a kiss is friendly rather than sexual. The tongue kiss is an act of total trust: the tongue is one of our most sensitive organs, and the mouth is the body cavity that can do it the quickest harm. The act permits us to savor another. But at the same time we exchange saliva, bacteria, viruses and food.(De Waal, 2005, p.90).

Bonobos kissing.

Personal Grooming.

You take a shower, put your clothes on, maybe some make up and perfume. Before leave the house, you need to fix your husband’s tie and your kids’ hair. Now everybody is ready to attend your cousin’s wedding! Grooming is a normal activity for humans and an expression of love for ourselves and our beloved ones, and with other primates is not different.

 Just as De Waal said “Grooming is the social cement of any primate society” and humans are not the exception. Perhaps we don’t spend hours cleaning the head of our children or friends as chimpanzees do but the simple act of grooming is another daily activity that we share with other primates.

Sharing food.

We share turkey in Thanksgiving day and Christmas, we do BBQs to share burgers and steak with our friends and some cultures sacrifice a lamb for special occasions like weddings. These activities are not exclusively human as share food, meat in particular, is also pretty common among chimpanzees and capuchin monkeys. (De Waal, 2005, p.206).

A group of Chimps sharing a meal.

In the wild, these primates chase monkeys until they capture one and they tear it apart so that everyone gets a piece.  Interestingly, food sharing is also possible with vegetarian meals. Frans De Waal observed that when he and his team fed chimpanzees at the zoo, normally watermelons or a tight bundle of branches with leaves, the primates burst out in a celebration during which they kiss and embrace each other.

So the next time that you are sharing food with your loved ones, have in mind that you are doing an activity that is normal for these primates and also is a heritage from our ancestors who were experts on hunting.

Reconciliation.

According to Cambridge Dictionary, reconciliation is a situation in which two people or groups of people become friendly again after they have argued (Cambridge, n/d). Humans are not the only creatures capable of this action, as every year are more proofs that reconciliation exist also in other primates. Frans de Waal has a fascinating story about an example of reconciliation between chimpanzees:

I’ll never forget one particular winter day at the Arnhem Zoo (Netherlands). The entire chimpanzee colony was locked indoors, out of the cold. In the course of a charging display, I watched the alpha male attack a female, which caused great commotion as other apes came to her defense. The group calmed down, but an unusual silence followed, as if everyone was waiting for something. It lasted a couple of minutes. Then, unexpectedly, the entire colony burst out hooting, and one male rhythmically stamped on the meal drums stacked in the corner of the hall. In the midst of all the pandemonium, at the center of attention, two chimps kissed and embraced. I reflected on this sequence for hours before I realized that the two embracing apes had been the male and female from the original row (De Waal, 2005, p 150).

There is something important to remember, just as chimpanzees, bonobos and capuchin monkeys, humans are social primates, hence social interactions are fundamental to our species. That is the reason why reconciliation for these primates is really important to maintain peace  within the group. We always believed that reconciliation was an authentic human action but now we know that is a normal strategy to resolve conflict among other primates too.

Empathy.

Comparative psychologist Nadezhda Ladygina-Kohts with Yoni, 1914.

This is connected and necessary for reconciliation. The Russian psychologist Nadezhda Ladygina-Kohts who raised a young chimpanzee named Yoni  during the early-twentieth century, discovered the existence of empathy in Yoni when she realised that the only way to get him off the roof of her house was to appeal to his concern for her:

“If I pretend to be crying, close my eyes, and weep, Yoni immediately stops his plays or any other activities, quickly runs over to me, all excited and shagged, from the most remote places in the house, such as the roof or the ceiling of his cage, from where I could not drive him down despite my persistent calls and entreaties. He hastily runs around me, as if looking for the offender, looking at my face, he tenderly takes my chin in his palm, lightly touches my face with his finger, as though trying to understand what is happening” (De Waal, 2005, p.184).

Basically, empathy is the ability to be affected by the state of another individual or creature. One of the reasons that a lot of scientists considered empathy as an exclusive human skill was because was assumed that empathy requires language. However, Carolyn Zahn-Waxler, who is one of the pioneers of empathy research in children, had discovered that empathy develops well before language. This is relevant for animal research and to understand that other mammals are capable to feel empathy as well.

For instance, Carolyn’s research team discovered that household pets, like dogs or cats, were as upset as children by distress-faking family members. The animals hovered over them, putting their heads in their laps with what looked like concern. Judge by the same standard as the children, the pets exhibited empathy as well. Such behaviour is even more striking in apes, specifically chimps. De Waal argues that it’s not unusual for a climbing youngster to fall out of a tree and scream. It will immediately be surrounded by others who hold and cradle it. In addition, if an adult chimpanzee loses a fight with a rival and sits screaming alone in a tree, others will climb toward him to touch and calm him (De Waal, 2005, p.183).

Therefore, the investigations of Ladygina-Kohts, Zahn-Waxler and De Waal, make us understand that spoken language is not necessary to have empathy. Just ask parents how they feel when they hear their babies crying. They do not know how to articulate words yet, but their weeping is enough to make adults empathize with infant’s distress. Additionally, adults can feel empathy for someone without hearing words too. A man feels worry when he hears his girlfriend sobbing and vice vice versa.

Although it’s not a real situation, but we can observe an useful example of empathy without spoken language between humans on the episode “Back from Vacation” from the famous American sitcom “The Office US”. At the minute 14:53, the secretary Pam Beesly is crying alone in the halls of the building where she works. Suddenly, the salesman Dwight Schrute, who has a cold but strong personality, finds her co-worker sobbing painfully after she witnessed Jim Halpert and his girlfriend Karen make up after a fight.

Who did this to you? asked Dwight, even thought Pam did not say a word, Dwight knew that something was wrong and felt empathy for her, because her tears were enough to communicate her sorrow. The scene concludes with Dwight putting his hand gently on Pam’s shoulder while she continues crying (The Office, 2007).

Dwight consoling his co-worker Pam. The Office US, S3 E11.

The most interesting thing about this scene is that a human being (Dwight) felt empathy to see another person crying and he tries to comfort her even when he does not know the reason of Pam’s sadness. The wonderful use of this information is not only to finally accept that humans, primates and other animals can feel empathy without the use of words, but also to embrace that human beings do not need to speak the same language in order to show empathy towards others.

Conclusion.

Maybe is unfair to write in the same article about obvious animalistic actions like kissing, eating and grooming with something more complex like reconciliation and empathy. Nevertheless, this article’s intention is to show the reader our similarities with other primates not only to embrace our animal reality but also to remember that we are able to connect positively with other humans regardless our race and language.

And at the same time, that we need to continue investigating even deeper to understand more our behaviour and our evolutionary connection with the rest of animal kingdom to improve our relationship with the natural world. I highly recommend the book “Our Inner Ape” by the leading primatologist Frans De Waal to know more about this topic. 

References.

De Waal, F. (2005) Our Inner Ape. Penguin Group.

Frans De Waal [Photograph]. https://www.ft.com/content/da283f36-3f9e-11e9-9bee-efab61506f44

Bonobos-Lola-Infants-kissing [Photograph] The Guardian, 2017. https://guardian.ng/life/love-and-relationships/why-do-we-kiss/attachment/bonobos-lola-infants-kissing/

Ian Gilby [Photograph] 2018, IFL Science. https://www.iflscience.com/plants-and-animals/some-chimps-have-a-very-gruesome-taste-in-food/

Cambridge Dictionary. (n/d) Reconciliation. Retrieved December 23, 2020 from: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/reconciliation

Nadezhda Ladygina-Kohts and the chimpanzee Joni, [Photograph] 1914. Official Portal of the Moscow Mayor and Moscow Government. https://www.mos.ru/en/news/item/74118073/

Farino, J (Director) Spitzer, J (Writer). (2007, April 1) Back from Vacation. (Season 3, Episode 11) [The Office US Episode] In Silverman, B. Daniels, G. Gervais, R. Merchant, S. Klein, H. Lieberstein, P. Celotta, J. Schur, M. Zbornak, K. (Producers) NBC Universal.

Fantasize is beneficial, as long as you know that you’re fantasizing.

In the past, some psychologists saw fantasies as something negative. Something that all patients should avoid in order to have a balanced life. However, today we know that fantasies could be beneficial for your mental health as long as you know that you are fantasizing. This sounds complex but it’s easy to understand. Fantasies (not only sexual but all kind of fictional scenarios in our mind) are essential to take a break from reality and relax from the stress of our normal life. Nevertheless, the key is to understand that those fantasies are just creations of our brain that can help us to relax but we shouldn’t spend too much time fantasizing and stop working in our personal aims in the real world.

The benefits of fantasize.

Portrait of Esther Perel, photo by Karen Harms.

Esther Perel, therapist and author of the best seller “Mating in captivity”, wrote about the new attitude in psychotherapy towards fantasies, she wrote “In my own practice, I’ve come to view fantasy as a valuable imaginative resource, whether it is cultivated by individuals or jointly by couples. The ability to go anywhere in our imagination is a pure expression of individual freedom. It is a creative force that can help us transcend reality. By giving us an occasional escape from a relationship, it serves as a powerful antidote to loss of libido within the relationship. Simply put, love and tenderness are enriched by the spice of imagination” (Perel, 2007).

Perel’s advice is useful not only to understand the benefits of sexual fantasies in relationships but to appreciate the power of our mind to create scenarios that can transcend reality. Fantasies are not only useful to understand our psyche but also to take a little break from reality.

Probably you learnt some meditation techniques where with your eyes closed and deep breaths you needed to imagine that you were walking in a forest or at the beach in order to feel more relaxed. Some people fantasize about other things, like visiting a magical land from a novel or videogame, or dancing under the stars with a famous and good looking actor. Regardless of what fantasy is your predilect, when we use these techniques, we use the power of our mind to be in places where we can feel safe and happier, at least for a couple of minutes. And then we come back to the real world feeling better.

The importance is understand where reality begins.

The biggest fear for a lot of people towards fantasies was that these could lead to permanently lose contact with reality. It is an understandable fear, however we know now that this could be avoidable if we are aware that our fantasies are just briefs escapes from reality and not the real life. A good method to avoid this issue is increase our body awareness. A term which means be aware of our body sensations with the world. Walks in the nature, breathing, yoga, exercise, cold showers are great ways to stay in contact with reality and the present. To conclude, we need to remember that fantasies are not negative if we are intelligent and we always return to the real world by the high sensitivity of our organic bodies.

References

Perel, E. (2007) Mating in Captivity, Unlocking Erotic Intelligence. 1st ed. Harper Collins. New York.

An Evening with Esther Perel (2020) [Online] https://artsandlectures.ucsb.edu/Details.aspx?PerfNum=4136

What we can learn from Jordan Peterson’s love towards lobsters.

Jordan Peterson is one of the most popular psychologist of our time. You can hate him or love him but his book, “12 rules for life” has some interesting stuff. 

During the first pages of chapter one, Peterson begins writing about our similarities with lobsters, birds and dolphins. Although he quoted the primatologist, Frans De Waal (page 10). I must admit that I disliked Peterson’s fascination with these crustaceous. Why lobsters? I asked myself. If we already know that we can learn a lot about our behaviour from other primates such as Chimpanzees and Bonobos why waste time comparing Homo Sapiens’ with something like a lobster? I tried to be more tolerant with the idea that we can learn something from dolphins because they are mammals like us and they are extremely intelligent, like most of us, but I did not want to accept the fact that we can learn a lot from other non human animals such as birds …. or lobsters!

How naive I was! but it is part of the process of learning. The reason why Peterson prefers to use lobsters as a way to explain humans’ hierarchies it is because their nervous systems are comparatively simple, with large, easily observable neurons. Because of this, scientist have been able to map the neural circuitry of lobsters very accurately. This has helped us understand the structure and function of the brain and behaviour of more complex animals, including human beings (Peterson, 2018).

Example of the organization of the neural circuits that control crayfish (a crustaceous related to lobsters) swimmerets. Diagram by Smarandache-Wellmann, Weller & Mulloney.

In fact, lobsters are not the only animals in the ocean with simple nervous systems. According to Jaak Panksepp professor emeritus in Psychobiology, there is a sea slug called California sea hare (Aplysia Californica) that fascinates scientists because, just like lobsters, it has a simple nervous system of about 20,000 nerve cells and a set of defensive reflexes that have been used effectively to study the neuronal basis of learning, especially classical conditioning.

Image of a Aplysia Californica. Credit to In-depth Images California.

For example, touching the siphon or gill leads to withdrawal of these organs, but this response habituates rapidly. If, however, this type of conditioned stimulus (touch) is paired with electric shock to the tail, the animal develops a conditioned learning has been most extensively studied in this creature, there has been some success in training these animals to also exhibit instrumental learning (Panksepp, 2005).

Why this is relevant to psychology? It is really necessary to study other non human animals in order to understand more about humans’ psyche? Well, I had those questions when I started to read Peterson’s book and was in other book “Our Inner Ape” by Frans de Waal that I finally understood the importance of study other animals in order to understand more about ourselves.

Primatologist Frans De Waal.

De Waal, famous Dutch primatologist who worked in the department of Psychology at Emory University in Atlanta, explains why we can learn not only from other primates but from birds and fish too: “Birds and fish have always held and appeal for me, so that even now my offices and labs have fish tanks, which students are sometimes asked to look after. They seek me out to learn about primates, and the I spring the fish on them!

De Waal continues explaining the importance of watch the behaviour of other animals in order to understand humans’ conduct and not only learn exclusively about human beings “Having been trained in anthropocentric disciplines, such as psychology and anthropology, they laugh (his students) at the possibility that slippery animals at the bottom of the evolutionary scale could be of interest. But they have much to teach us. And as for every creature on earth, the urge to reproduce is at the core of their existence (De Waal, 2005).

Overall, De Waal  and Panksepp arguments helped me to understand more Jordan Peterson’s attitude towards lobsters but at the same time to realise that a lot of people in psychology (myself included) had an anthropocentric education at University, where a lot of subjects are about the study of human beings exclusively without considering our similarities with other animals. Certainly, it is fundamental to analyze the scientific studies in humans’ and the investigations about human brain.

However, it is also important to encourage students in psychology to analyze deeply the behaviour and neurological systems in other animals as well. In addition, we should not only focus our attention in primates because different species in animal kingdom have a lot to teach us about our own behaviour and what we can learn from them in order to have healthier individuals in our societies. Without mention the benefits to be closer to nature and feel more empathy and compassion towards other animals.

References

Smarandache-Wellmann, C. Weller, C. & Mulloney, B. (2014) Mechanisms of coordination in distributed neural circuits: Decoding and integration of coordinating information. ResearchGate, The Journal of Neuroscience: The official journal of the society for Neuroscience. https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Organization-of-the-neural-circuits-that-control-crayfish-swimmerets-A-The-crayfish_fig1_259767833

De Waal, F. (2005) Our Inner Ape. Penguin Group.

Peterson, J. (2018) 12 rules for life. An antidote to chaos. Penguin Books.

Panksepp, J. (2005) Affective Neuroscience. The foundation of human and animal emotions. Oxford University Press.

Jordan Peterson Photograph [Photograph], by Phil Fisk. The observer, 2018. https://www.theguardian.com/global/2018/jan/21/jordan-peterson-self-help-author-12-steps-interview

Aplysia Californica [Photograph] by In-Depth Images California. Underwater kwaj, 2008. http://www.underwaterkwaj.com/nudi/california/c010.htm

Frans De Waal [Photograph], by Catherin Marin, Library of Congress. https://www.loc.gov/events/2019-national-book-festival/authors/item/n82002623/frans-de-waal/