the ability to learn from other individuals, is a controversial topic in most nonhuman species like S. apella because of the relative difficulty of determining whether a behavior was learned from imitation or a much simpler form of social learning. One way of closing the gap between concurrent tool related behaviors and their likelihood of arising from imitation is by narrowing down events that would make social learning more probable such as a preference for observing experienced tool users. In this regard, Ottoni and his team found that young capuchins tended to observe the best tool users when cracking nuts. Another way of isolating imitation from other simpler behaviors is to present the capuchins with a box that has food but has two different ways of opening it. The important point is that neither way should be more advantageous so that the monkey can freely choose one. In one such study, when humans opened the door in front of the monkeys using one way only, the monkeys used that method, even when they discovered the alternative on their own. In another study, capuchin alphas from two separate groups were trained to open the door in a specific way, after which the monkeys were paired with subordinates who learned to open the door in the same way. When capuchins are trained in the same way and this time released into their groups, the habit is once again disseminated amongst all group members even when others discover alternative ways. Nevertheless, the subject of whether or not S. apella learns by imitation is still controversial, because of the inherent difficulty in teasing out unambiguous evidence of a complex cognitive process such as imitation. Problem solving Tool use and manufacture can also shed light on the many aspects of the tufted capuchin's cognitive abilities by determining how it solves some problems. Some non-primates manufacture and use objects as tools. Crows are known to make hook-tools for catching insects, but such activities lack the behavioral plasticity of tool use as evidenced in tufted capuchins who found new ways to use tools that other species could not. But this plasticity in tool use, while suggesting greater complexity and cognitive ability, does not suggest that the monkeys understand cause and effect. It instead implies they are only able to learn from successful efforts but not from failures, nor are they able to refine and improve much. Its