He ran back in to the house, and collapsed dead on his special bed, leaving a trail of blood behind him. He opened one of their patrol car's doors and lunged at an officer.ĭespite being shot four times at point blank range, Travis didn't die. When police arrived, Travis was in a frenzy of bloodlust. "He looked at me like, ‘Mom, what did you do?’” It wasn't working, so I went and I had to get a knife - and I stabbed him.
Sandra said: “I grabbed the shovel and hit him with the shovel to stop it. She recalled how he turned around and looked at her, before she ran for her life and locked herself in her car. Astonishingly, his victim, Charla Nash, survived, but you could argue that in many ways, her life too came to an abrupt end that day.ĭesperate, Sandra stabbed him in the back with a carving knife and battered him over the head with a shovel in a bid to make him stop, which it did for a moment. I can’t … He’s eating her! He’s eating her! Please! God! Please! Where are they? Where are they?” “Gun! They got to shoot him! Please! Please! Hurry! Hurry! Please! I can’t. “He-he ripped her face off! He's eating her face! "He ripped her apart! Hurry up! Hurry up! Please!” Herold breathlessly replies. "Tell me, what is the monkey doing?," the operator asks as Travis's harrowing, almost gleeful, wails and screeches echo down the line. These data suggest that face processing in chimpanzees fits within a face space framework, and supports evolutionary continuity in face processing in Hominoids.It's hard to know what is more chilling about Sandra Herold's 911 call - hearing her helpless sobbing as she reveals her pet chimp is "eating" her friend's face, or the ape's frenzied screams in the background.įor an excruciating 12 minutes, Sandra is heard pleading for police to rush to her home to shoot dead Travis, the animal she had raised as her own son for the previous 14 years, reports the Daily Star. An analysis of the faces suggested that the dimensions could be described as lower face width and overall head size. Faces separated by the shorter angles, suggesting similar diagnostic features, were discriminated more poorly than faces separated by large angles. Finally, performance also correlated with vector angle. Notably, the worst performance was for the average face. Chimpanzees' performance was significantly correlated with both the typicality ratings and vector lengths, such that distinctive faces were discriminated better than typical faces. Human experts' typicality ratings were significantly correlated with vector lengths, where the average face was rated most typical. As predicted by the face space model, the average face was positioned centrally in the MDS plot, having the second shortest vector. From the MDS plot, we measured the length of each identity vector with regard to the origin, the vector angle between each face in the 190 dyads, and calculated the mean typicality ratings. Typicality ratings for the 20 faces were also obtained from human primate experts. Multidimensional scaling was then used to generate a two-dimensional plot representing discrimination performance (% correct). Five chimpanzees discriminated all combinations of 20 female faces (380 dyads repeated 10 times), including a 20-face population average, in a matching-to-sample task. We examined whether the face space framework can aid our understanding of face processing in the chimpanzee, a species that shares many of the same cognitive specializations for face processing as humans.
Face space is a powerful framework that can explain various face processing phenomena in humans, including poor recognition memory for unfamiliar faces and other-race effects, however, it has yet to be applied to other species.
0 kommentar(er)
