Kanzi’s Tea Party: The Day We Found Imagination in Our Bonobo Cousins

1. Introduction: The Evolutionary Roots of the "Mind's Eye"

The definition of humanity has historically been predicated on a series of cognitive "Rubicons"—distinct mental faculties that supposedly separate Homo sapiens from the rest of the animal kingdom. For centuries, philosophers and scientists drew these boundaries at the use of tools, the acquisition of language, and the transmission of culture. As the fields of primatology and comparative psychology matured throughout the 20th and 21st centuries, these barriers were dismantled one by one. Jane Goodall’s observation of chimpanzees modifying grass stems to fish for termites in Gombe shattered the definition of "Man the Toolmaker." Subsequent research into ape communication, characterized by the acquisition of American Sign Language (ASL) and lexigrammatic systems by great apes, challenged the notion that symbolic communication was the exclusive province of humanity.

As these physical and linguistic barriers fell, the frontier of human uniqueness retreated to a more abstract, internal domain: the capacity for imagination. This faculty, specifically the ability to engage in "secondary representation" or pretense, allows the mind to decouple from immediate sensory reality and entertain counterfactual states. It is the engine of human innovation, storytelling, planning, and empathy. It allows a child to perceive a banana as a telephone, an architect to envision a cathedral where there is only empty space, and a novelist to construct entire universes that exist solely in the collective mind. For decades, the scientific consensus held that while great apes possess sophisticated social intelligence and problem-solving abilities, they live largely in the "here and now," tethered to primary representations of physical reality.

However, anecdotal evidence from the field has long hinted at a richer inner life in our closest relatives. Researchers have reported juvenile chimpanzees cradling sticks like infants, treating them with maternal care in a manner reminiscent of human doll play.¹ Captive apes have been observed making "dragging" motions with their arms as if pulling heavy, invisible blocks, despite holding nothing.¹ These observations, while compelling, lacked the experimental rigor to rule out simpler associative learning mechanisms or stereotypic behaviors. The capacity to inhabit a mental world distinct from the physical one remained, in the rigorous eyes of experimental psychology, a uniquely human adaptation.

In February 2026, this paradigm was fundamentally challenged. A landmark study published in Science by researchers Christopher Krupenye of Johns Hopkins University and Amalia Bastos of the University of St Andrews provided the first controlled experimental evidence of secondary representation in a non-human primate.¹ The subject of this study was Kanzi (1980–2025), a male bonobo (Pan paniscus) whose life history as a language-trained, deeply enculturated ape made him a unique ambassador between species. Through a series of controlled "tea party" experiments, Kanzi demonstrated the ability to track the location of imaginary objects—pretend juice and invisible grapes—thereby proving that the cognitive architecture for make-believe is not a uniquely human acquisition.¹

This report offers an exhaustive analysis of these findings, situating them within the broader context of Kanzi’s biography, the theoretical frameworks of cognitive psychology, and the evolutionary history of the primate mind. By synthesizing data from the 2026 pretense study, the 2025 "Theory of Mind" study ⁶, and historical records of ape behavior, we arrive at a compelling conclusion: the roots of human imagination extend back at least 6 to 9 million years to the common ancestor of humans and the genus Pan.¹

2. Theoretical Framework: Defining the Boundaries of Thought in Apes

To fully appreciate the significance of the Kanzi protocols, it is necessary to navigate the complex theoretical landscape of representational psychology. The debate over animal imagination is not merely about behavior; it is about the underlying mechanics of the mind—how the brain constructs models of the world and how it distinguishes between "what is" and "what might be."

2.1 Primary Representation: The Anchor of Reality

The concept of representation is central to cognitive science. At its most basic level, a primary representation is a direct semantic mapping of the physical world. When an organism perceives a cup as empty, its cognitive system forms a primary representation: The cup is empty. This model is updated constantly based on sensory input—visual data, tactile feedback, and olfactory cues. Primary representation is the default mode of cognition for navigating the environment; it is essential for survival, allowing an organism to locate food, avoid predators, and navigate terrain.¹

For most of evolutionary history, primary representation was sufficient. An animal needs to know where the predator is, not where the predator might be in a fictional story. The primary representation must be faithful to reality; a divergence between the mental model and the physical world usually indicates a hallucination or an error, both of which can be fatal in the wild.

2.2 Secondary Representation and the "Decoupling" Mechanism

Secondary representation involves the capacity to hold a mental model that differs from immediate reality. In the context of pretense, the mind must simultaneously hold the primary representation (The cup is empty) and a secondary representation (The cup contains juice). Crucially, the secondary representation must be isolated from the primary one to prevent confusion. If the two representations were to blend, the individual might become delusional, attempting to drink from an empty cup to quench a real biological thirst.

This isolation is achieved through a cognitive mechanism known as decoupling, a concept first elaborated by psychologist Alan Leslie in 1987 regarding the origins of "Theory of Mind" in human children.⁹ Decoupling acts as a form of "cognitive quarantine." The mind copies the primary representation and places it in a separate mental workspace—often referred to metaphorically as a "possible world box"—where it can be manipulated without corrupting the organism's knowledge of reality.

• The Process of Decoupling:

• Perception: The child sees a banana. The primary representation is "This is a banana."

• Copying: The mind creates a duplicate of this representation.

• Quarantine: This duplicate is tagged as "pretend" or "non-real."

• Manipulation: The child modifies the duplicate representation: "This banana is a telephone."

• Dual Processing: The child now holds two contradictory models: "This is a banana" (Reality) and "This is a telephone" (Pretense).

Because the secondary representation is decoupled, the child can talk into the banana (acting on the secondary model) while simultaneously refraining from eating it (acting on the primary model) or eating it later when the game ends. This ability to run two "files" simultaneously is the cognitive foundation of imagination.⁹

2.3 Metarepresentation and the "Metamind"

Secondary representation is intimately linked to, and often considered a precursor of, metarepresentation—the ability to represent representations as representations. This recursive thinking (thinking about thoughts) is the bedrock of "Theory of Mind" (ToM), the ability to attribute mental states like beliefs, desires, and intentions to others.⁸

If an individual can hold a secondary representation (The world is X, but I am imagining Y), they are cognitively primed to understand that another individual might hold a representation distinct from reality (a false belief). For example, if a chimp can understand "The cup is empty, but Kanzi pretends it is full," they are steps away from understanding "The cup is empty, but the researcher believes it is full."

The "Metamind" hypothesis suggests that these skills—pretense, ToM, and mental time travel (episodic memory and foresight)—are not isolated modules but expressions of a single, domain-general capacity for abstract modeling.¹² This suite of abilities allows the mind to detach from the present moment. The 2026 Kanzi study serves as a critical test of this hypothesis: if a bonobo can engage in pretense, it suggests the existence of this generalized "Metamind" in our closest relatives, contradicting the "simpler" explanations often used to dismiss ape intelligence.

3. Subject Profile: The Enculturated Mind of Bonobo's, Represented by Kanzi

Interpreting the results of the 2026 study requires a nuanced understanding of the subject. Kanzi was not a typical wild bonobo; he was arguably the most cognitively sophisticated non-human primate in recorded history, a product of a unique socio-linguistic environment that may have unlocked latent potentials within the ape genome.¹

3.1 Spontaneous Linguistic Acquisition and "Enculturation"

Kanzi was born on October 28, 1980, at the Yerkes Field Station in Atlanta, Georgia. His introduction to language was serendipitous, marking a departure from previous ape language experiments that relied on intensive operant conditioning (reward-based training). Researchers, led by Sue Savage-Rumbaugh, were attempting to teach lexigrams (geometric symbols representing words) to Kanzi's adoptive mother, Matata. Matata, captured in the wild, struggled to grasp the symbolic nature of the lexigrams. However, the infant Kanzi, who accompanied Matata to her sessions, spontaneously internalized the system merely by observing the interactions.¹

By adolescence, Kanzi had mastered over 348 lexigram symbols and developed a receptive comprehension of spoken English estimated at approximately 3,000 words.¹ He could understand novel sentences (e.g., "Put the soap in the water") that he had never heard before, demonstrating a grasp of syntax and grammatical relationships rather than just rote word association.

This process is known as enculturation—the immersion of an ape in a human-like cultural, social, and linguistic environment from infancy. Critics like Miquel Llorente argue that Kanzi was an "enculturated genius," meaning his cognitive abilities were "scaffolding" by human interaction.¹ His mind represents the potential of the bonobo genome when amplified by culture, rather than the baseline phenotype of the species in the wild. This distinction is vital: Kanzi shows us what a bonobo can do, not necessarily what a bonobo does in the rainforests of the Congo.

3.2 Evidence of Pre-Experimental Imagination

Long before the formal experiments of 2026, Kanzi exhibited behaviors suggestive of a rich imaginative life, providing the anecdotal foundation that justified the later rigorous testing.

• Oldowan Tool Making: Kanzi learned to knap stone tools to cut rope, employing lithic reduction techniques. While his initial attempts were crude, he eventually developed a technique that produced sharp flakes capable of slicing through tough materials. Researchers noted that his percussion strikes were similar to those employed by early hominin Oldowan toolmakers (Homo habilis), dating back 2.6 million years.¹ This tool-making requires foresight—a mental image of the finished tool held in the mind while manipulating the raw stone—which is a form of secondary representation.

• Symbolic Engagement with Media: Perhaps most telling was his engagement with narrative film. Kanzi reportedly had favorite movies, specifically Quest for Fire (a film about early humans discovering fire) and Greystoke: The Legend of Tarzan. He would request these films by combining lexigrams such as "Fire" and "TV" on his keyboard.¹ This behavior implies an ability to engage with represented worlds—fictional narratives—and communicate desires related to those non-physical experiences. He was observed reacting to the films with vocalizations appropriate to the scenes (fear at villains, excitement at heroes), suggesting a suspension of disbelief required for narrative absorption.¹⁹

• Gaming and Digital Navigation: In his later years, Kanzi engaged with digital interfaces, famously playing games like Pac-Man and Minecraft. In Minecraft, he navigated 3D virtual environments, mining materials and engaging in tasks that required spatial reasoning within a simulated world.²⁰ This ability to operate within a digital "pretend" space provided early, albeit observational, evidence of his capacity for decoupling—manipulating an avatar in a secondary reality while physically remaining in the primary one.

Kanzi passed away in March 2025 from heart failure, making the 2026 publication a posthumous testament to his legacy.¹⁴ The study stands as a final window into the mind of a creature who bridged the gap between ape and human cognition.

4. The 2026 Pretense Study: Methodology and Analysis

The study by Bastos and Krupenye, titled "Evidence for representation of pretend objects by Kanzi, a language trained bonobo," sought to move beyond anecdote and subject ape imagination to rigorous experimental control.¹ While previous reports of ape pretense were vulnerable to interpretations of behavioral cuing or conditioning, this study utilized a "tea party" paradigm adapted from developmental psychology to test whether Kanzi could track the state of an object that did not physically exist.

4.1 Experiment 1: The Pretend Juice Task

The primary objective of this experiment was to test Kanzi’s ability to track a narrative of "invisible liquid" without any sensory cues. The setup mimicked the "shell game" or displacement tasks used with human children.

Methodology:

Kanzi sat across from an experimenter at a table. Crucially, all apparatus—a pitcher and two transparent cups—were physically empty. This was essential to eliminate any possibility of Kanzi reacting to the smell, sight, or sound of real liquid, forcing him to rely solely on the social and representational cues.

1. The Pour: The experimenter mimed pouring "juice" from the empty pitcher into the two empty cups.

2. The Emptying: The experimenter then mimed pouring the contents of one cup back into the pitcher. To emphasize the state change, the experimenter shook the cup upside down, a conventional signal for "empty".¹

3. The Prompt: Kanzi was asked, "Where is the juice?" or to "Find the juice."

Results: Kanzi correctly identified the cup "containing" the imaginary juice in 68% of trials (34 out of 50).¹

• Statistical Significance: This result was statistically significant, indicating performance well above chance levels (50%).

• Implication: Kanzi was not responding to the physical reality (both cups were empty). Instead, he was tracking a mental model: Cup A has juice, Cup B was emptied. He successfully updated his secondary representation based on the experimenter's pantomime.¹ The ability to update a mental file ("The cup is now empty") based on a pretend action is a sophisticated cognitive operation.

4.2 Experiment 2: The Reality Check

Skeptics might argue that Kanzi was not "pretending" but was simply deluded or mistaken—perhaps believing the cups actually contained a difficult-to-see liquid, or that he had been conditioned to point to cups regardless of content. To address this, the researchers implemented a control condition.

Methodology:

Kanzi was presented with a simultaneous choice:

• Option A: A cup containing the "pretend" juice established in the previous trials.

• Option B: A cup containing real juice.

Results: Kanzi chose the real juice 77.8% of the time.¹

• Interpretation: This result is crucial. It demonstrates that Kanzi maintained a clear distinction between the primary representation (reality/real juice) and the secondary representation (pretense/imaginary juice). He understood the "game" but, being a rational biological agent, prioritized the actual caloric reward. This confirms that his behavior in Experiment 1 was a voluntary suspension of disbelief, not a failure of perception or understanding.¹ He knew the difference between the symbol and the referent, the map and the territory.

4.3 Experiment 3: The Grape Task (Conceptual Replication)

To rule out lower-level associative learning mechanisms, specifically "stimulus enhancement," the researchers designed a third experiment using solid objects.

The "Stimulus Enhancement" Problem:

In Experiment 1, the experimenter interacted with both cups. However, a skeptic could argue that Kanzi simply picked the cup the experimenter didn't interact with last, or followed some other behavioral cue involving the amount of movement.

Methodology:

This task used imaginary grapes and jars.

1. Training: Kanzi first passed a training phase with real grapes, scoring 100% to ensure he understood the mechanics of the task.¹

2. The Place: Using an empty container, the experimenter mimed picking up a grape and placing it into one of two jars.

3. The Removal: The experimenter then mimed removing the imaginary grape from one of the jars.

4. The Interaction (Critical Control): The "removing" action involved vigorous physical interaction with the empty jar (shaking it, touching it). If Kanzi were relying on stimulus enhancement (the tendency to choose the object the human touched most or most vigorously), he would be drawn to the jar that was being emptied.¹

Results: Kanzi correctly identified the jar containing the imaginary grape in 69% of trials (31 out of 45).¹

• Implication: Kanzi inhibited the impulse to select the container associated with the most recent/vigorous movement. Instead, he tracked the abstract location of the object based on the narrative of the pantomime. This strongly supports the hypothesis of secondary representation and rules out simple attention-based explanations.¹

4.4 Summary of Experimental Data

The convergence of data across these three experiments provides robust evidence for the existence of imagination in Pan paniscus.

Experiment	Stimulus Type	Task Description	Success Rate
Exp 1: Juice	Imaginary Liquid	Track location after pouring/emptying	68% (34/50)
Exp 2: Reality	Real vs. Imaginary	Choice between real/pretend reward	77.8% (Real)
Exp 3: Grape	Imaginary Solid	Track location after placing/removing	69% (31/45)

Table 1: Summary of Kanzi's performance in the 2026 pretense protocols.¹

5. Discussion: The Mechanics of the Ape Mind

The results of the 2026 study do more than demonstrate a clever trick; they illuminate the cognitive mechanics of the bonobo mind and challenge long-held assumptions about the uniqueness of human thought.

5.1 The Capacity for Decoupling

The core theoretical contribution of this work is the confirmation that a non-human primate can operate with decoupled representations. As co-author Amalia Bastos noted, Kanzi could "generate an idea of this pretend object and at the same time know it's not real".¹ This dual-processing—holding the concept of "juice" in the mind while perceiving an "empty cup" with the eyes—requires sophisticated executive function. It necessitates the inhibition of the primary representation to allow the secondary one to guide behavior in the context of the game.

This challenges the "Process of Elimination" critique proposed by researcher Juan Carlos Gómez. Gómez suggested Kanzi might simply be choosing the cup that wasn't emptied, reasoning that "something might be there".¹ However, even this "simpler" explanation relies on a form of representation. To eliminate a cup based on it being emptied, Kanzi must first represent the possibility of content. If he purely relied on primary representation (what he sees), both cups are empty, and there is nothing to track or eliminate. The logic of elimination in this context presupposes the representation of a hypothetical entity. Kanzi must imagine something exists to engage in the elimination process at all.

5.2 The "Enculturated Genius" Critique

A significant limitation of the study, acknowledged by the wider scientific community, is the sample size (N = 1) and the subject's unique history. Kanzi was an outlier. Miquel Llorente describes Kanzi as an "enculturated genius," arguing that his abilities reflect the potential of the bonobo mind when "scaffolded" by human culture, rather than the species' standard cognitive state.¹

This critique is valid but does not diminish the evolutionary implications. The fact that a bonobo can develop this capacity—given the right environment—proves that the neurological hardware for imagination is present in the genus Pan. It suggests that the capacity for secondary representation is not a uniquely human mutation but a shared trait that may remain latent or expressed differently in wild populations. Just as a human child raised in isolation (a "feral child") might not develop complex pretend play or language, an ape requires socio-cultural triggers—specifically the rich symbolic environment of the Great Ape Trust—to manifest these latent abilities.¹

Furthermore, the "enculturation" argument touches on Niche Construction Theory. Humans do not just adapt to environments; we create cognitive niches (schools, language, tools) that shape the development of our offspring. Kanzi was raised in a human-designed cognitive niche. The result suggests that the difference between human and ape cognition may be less about raw biological hardware and more about the cultural software installed during development.²³

5.3 Validating the Anecdotal Record

Kanzi's experimental success forces a re-evaluation of historical anecdotes from the field and captivity. With the experimental confirmation of decoupling in Pan, previous observations that were dismissed as anthropomorphism or error now gain credibility.

• The Stick Dolls: In the Kanyawara chimpanzee community in Uganda, researchers Sonya Kahlenberg and Richard Wrangham (2010) observed juvenile females carrying sticks, taking them into nests, and treating them with maternal care.¹ This behavior was distinct from tool use and ceased when the females had their first real offspring. Critics argued this was merely "object carriage." However, in light of Kanzi's data, it is scientifically robust to interpret this as a form of "play-mothering," where the chimp imposes a secondary representation (baby) onto a primary object (stick). The sex differences observed (females doing this significantly more than males) align with biological predispositions toward maternal behavior, further supporting the idea that this is a biologically rooted form of play.²

• Imaginary Blocks: Captive chimpanzees have been observed making "dragging" motions with their arms as if pulling heavy blocks, despite holding nothing.¹ Previously dismissed as stereotypic or neurotic behavior, Kanzi's ability to track invisible objects lends credence to the interpretation that these chimps are simulating a physical activity with imaginary objects—a form of solitary pretense.

• The Case of Viki: In the 1950s, the Hayes family raised a chimpanzee named Viki. Viki was observed dragging an imaginary pull-toy on a string. On one occasion, the imaginary string supposedly got "stuck," and Viki engaged in elaborate pantomime to "untangle" it.²⁶ At the time, this was often dismissed as over-interpretation by affectionate owners. The 2026 study vindicates Viki’s behavior as a likely genuine expression of decoupled representation.

6. Broader Evolutionary Context

The 2026 pretense study does not exist in a vacuum. It complements a burgeoning body of research indicating that the "human" mind is far older than humanity itself.

6.1 Theory of Mind and Shared Intentionality

The pretense study followed closely on the heels of a 2025 study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), which also involved Kanzi alongside bonobos Nyota and Teco.⁶ This study investigated "Theory of Mind" (ToM) by testing whether bonobos could distinguish between a researcher who was ignorant of a food location and one who was knowledgeable.

The experiment involved a "baiting" scenario. Sometimes the researcher saw where the food was hidden (knowledgeable); sometimes a barrier prevented them from seeing (ignorant). The results were striking: the bonobos pointed significantly more often and more quickly to the hidden food when the researcher was ignorant than when they were knowledgeable.⁶ This implies that bonobos can represent the mental state of another being—specifically, the state of ignorance—and act to correct it.

The link between ToM and Pretense is cognitive decoupling. To understand that another person perceives the world differently (ignorance/false belief), one must decouple one's own primary representation of reality from the representation of the other's mind. The fact that bonobos succeed in both pretense tasks (2026) and false-belief/ignorance tasks (2025) strongly suggests they possess a functional "Metamind"—a suite of cognitive tools for modeling alternative realities and minds.¹ This contradicts the hypothesis that ToM is a uniquely human module (often associated with the "Machiavellian Intelligence" hypothesis) and suggests a deeper primate origin for social cognition.

6.2 Phylogenetic Origins: The Deep History of Imagination

The presence of secondary representation in humans, bonobos, and chimpanzees implies that this trait is homologous—inherited from a common ancestor—rather than an analogous trait evolved independently (convergent evolution). This shifts the timeline of imagination's origin significantly deeper into the past.

• Timeline: The Last Common Ancestor (LCA) of humans and the genus Pan (chimpanzees and bonobos) lived approximately 6 to 9 million years ago.¹

• Implications: This suggests that the "software" for imagination (the ability to think "what if") evolved long before the "hardware" of modern human language, large brains, or complex stone tools (which appear around 2.6 - 3.3 million years ago).

This radically alters our understanding of cognitive evolution. It implies that the capacity to simulate possible futures and imaginary worlds was a prerequisite for the evolution of language, not a byproduct of it. It allowed early hominids to visualize tools within raw stone, imagine the intentions of predators, and navigate complex social hierarchies. The cognitive Rubicon was crossed not by Homo sapiens, or even Homo habilis, but by an ape-like ancestor wandering the Miocene forests.

6.3 Convergent Evolution in Distant Taxa?

While the focus here is on primates, the broader biological context includes evidence of similar capacities in distant species, particularly corvids (scrub jays, crows) and cetaceans.

• Corvids: Western scrub jays demonstrate episodic foresight, caching food in anticipation of future hunger states distinct from their current state. This requires a form of secondary representation (representing a future self).¹¹

• Implication: This suggests that the capacity to decouple from the present is a potent evolutionary adaptation that has arisen independently (convergent evolution) in highly social, cognitively complex lineages.²³ However, the primate version of this faculty, shared by humans and bonobos, appears to be uniquely tied to social manipulation, cooperative communication ("Shared Intentionality"), and eventual symbolic culture.

7. Conclusion: The Legacy of Kanzi

The scientific journey of Kanzi the bonobo, spanning four and a half decades, has systematically dismantled the barriers separating human and animal cognition. He showed us that apes can understand spoken language, craft stone tools, navigate digital worlds, and, as confirmed by the 2026 study, play make-believe.

The evidence from the Kanzi protocols proves that the bonobo mind is not confined to the literal and the immediate. Like us, they can look at an empty cup and choose to see it as full. They can inhabit a world of "as if." This shared capacity for secondary representation suggests that imagination is not a miraculous spark that appeared solely in the human lineage, but an ancient cognitive flame, kindled millions of years ago in the dense forests of our ancestral past.

As we mourn Kanzi, who passed away in March 2025, we must recognize him not merely as a subject of research, but as a pivotal figure in the history of science. His life provided the empirical weight to prove that the mind's eye—the seat of our dreams, our plans, and our stories—is a heritage we share with our closest living kin. The silence he leaves behind is filled with the echoes of a conversation that has only just begun—a conversation about the unity of life and the ancient, shared roots of the imagination.

Works cited

1. apes | The Tinkering Primate, accessed February 7, 2026, https://thetinkeringprimate.wordpress.com/tag/apes/

2. Bonobo Kanzi Plays Pretend Like a Child, Showing Ape's Capacity to Imagine, accessed February 7, 2026, https://www.discovermagazine.com/bonobo-kanzi-plays-pretend-like-a-child-showing-ape-s-capacity-to-imagine-48646

3. Apes share human ability to imagine, accessed February 7, 2026, https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1114776

4. Apes possess the human-like ability to imagine, study reveals in new science magazine headline., accessed February 7, 2026, https://bioengineer.org/apes-possess-the-human-like-ability-to-imagine-study-reveals-in-new-science-magazine-headline/

5. Bonobos point more for ignorant than knowledgeable social partners - PNAS, accessed February 7, 2026, https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2412450122

6. Evidence for representation of pretend objects by Kanzi, a language trained bonobo, accessed February 7, 2026, https://research-portal.st-andrews.ac.uk/en/publications/01ed0d8b-48d7-44ce-ad5c-f2ec9402304d

7. Apes have culture but may not know that they do - PMC, accessed February 7, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4319388/

8. Cognitive decoupling and banana phones – drossbucket, accessed February 7, 2026, https://drossbucket.com/2019/10/23/cognitive-decoupling-and-banana-phones/

9. Distinguishing the reflective, algorithmic, and autonomous minds: Is it time for a tri-process theory? - Keith Stanovich, accessed February 7, 2026, http://keithstanovich.com/Site/Research_on_Reasoning_files/Stanovich_Two_MInds.pdf

10. The rise of the metamind Thomas Suddendorf - UQ eSpace, accessed February 7, 2026, https://espace.library.uq.edu.au/view/UQ:10282/Rise_of_the_Meta.pdf

11. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 21, 131. Simpler for Evolution: Secondary Representation in Apes, Children, and Ancestors Tho - University of Southampton Web Archive, accessed February 7, 2026, https://web-archive.southampton.ac.uk/cogprints.org/2614/1/bbs.pdf

12. Did Kanzi the bonobo understand language? - Linguistic Discovery, accessed February 7, 2026, https://linguisticdiscovery.com/posts/kanzi/

13. Famous bonobo Kanzi, known for smarts & gaming, dies at age 44 - Mongabay, accessed February 7, 2026, https://news.mongabay.com/short-article/2025/03/famous-bonobo-kanzi-known-for-smarts-gaming-dies-at-age-44/

14. Bonobo Kanzi shows that the ability to imagine is not unique to humans, accessed February 7, 2026, https://sciencemediacentre.es/en/bonobo-kanzi-shows-ability-imagine-not-unique-humans

15. Stone tool production and utilization by bonobo-chimpanzees (Pan paniscus) - PNAS, accessed February 7, 2026, https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1212855109

16. Montana State University-Billings Apes and Language: A Turabian Style Sample Paper Karen Shaw English 214 Professor Bell 22 Marc, accessed February 7, 2026, https://www.msubillings.edu/asc/resources/writing/pdf/Turabian%20Style%20Sample%20Paper.pdf

17. Can Animals Think? - Time Magazine, accessed February 7, 2026, https://time.com/archive/6722685/can-animals-think/

18. Sue Rumbaugh and Kanzi the Bonobo: Lighting the Path Forward and Creating the Predicates of Change - Issuu, accessed February 7, 2026, https://issuu.com/unionintavocats/docs/ji-2021-1-bat/s/12540281

19. Meet Kanzi, the Minecraft gamer monkey | Inquirer Technology, accessed February 7, 2026, https://technology.inquirer.net/126661/kanzi-minecraft-monkey

20. Kanzi - Wikipedia, accessed February 7, 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kanzi

21. Pretend Play as Twin Earth: A Social-Cognitive Analysis - Get Started with OpenScholar, accessed February 7, 2026, https://uva.theopenscholar.com/files/early-development-lab/files/pretend_play_as_8.pdf

22. The evolution of animal 'cultures' and social intelligence - PMC, accessed February 7, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2346520/

23. Apes, symbols, and the evolution of language by Janni Pedersen A dissertation submitted to the graduate facul, accessed February 7, 2026, https://dr.lib.iastate.edu/server/api/core/bitstreams/7e47035c-f4f8-43c6-a8cf-0a2c61e97d85/content

24. Infant chimps play with 'stick dolls' | Animal behaviour - The Guardian, accessed February 7, 2026, https://www.theguardian.com/science/2010/dec/20/chimps-play-male-female-genetic

25. Pretend and Socio-dramatic Play in Evolutionary and Developmental Perspective (Chapter 5) - Ritual, Play and Belief, in Evolution and Early Human Societies - Cambridge University Press & Assessment, accessed February 7, 2026, https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/ritual-play-and-belief-in-evolution-and-early-human-societies/pretend-and-sociodramatic-play-in-evolutionary-and-developmental-perspective/6A35BD3B7ADF9E0C197AFF5B63455132

26. Metarepresentations: A Multidisciplinary Perspective 0195141148, 0195141156, 9780195349689, 0195349687, 9780195141146 - DOKUMEN.PUB, accessed February 7, 2026, https://dokumen.pub/metarepresentations-a-multidisciplinary-perspective-0195141148-0195141156-9780195349689-0195349687-9780195141146.html

27. Bonobos point more for ignorant than knowledgeable social partners - ResearchGate, accessed February 7, 2026, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/388659029_Bonobos_point_more_for_ignorant_than_knowledgeable_social_partners

28. The evolution of foresight: What is mental time travel, and is it unique to humans? - CORE, accessed February 7, 2026, https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/85220965.pdf

29. Bonobos Demonstrate Imaginative Ability in New Experiments, accessed February 7, 2026, https://www.sci.news/biology/bonobo-imagination-14538.html

30. Is It Ritual? Or Is It Children? Distinguishing Consequences of Play from Ritual Actions in the Prehistoric Archaeological Record | Current Anthropology: Vol 59, No 5, accessed February 7, 2026, https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/699837

31. Theory of Mind and Representational Ability: Normal, Autistic, and Mentally Retarded Korean Children's Understanding of False Beliefs and False Photos - Korea Journal Central, accessed February 7, 2026, http://journal.kci.go.kr/baldal/archive/articleView?artiId=ART001108157

32. Evidence of Grammatical Knowledge in Apes: An Analysis of Kanzi's Performance on Reversible Sentences - PMC, accessed February 7, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9355523/