|
|
Gallup, G. G. J. (1985). Do minds exist in species other than our own? Neurosci Biobehav Rev, 9(4), 631–641.
Abstract: An answer to the question of animal awareness depends on evidence, not intuition, anecdote, or debate. This paper examines some of the problems inherent in an analysis of animal awareness, and whether animals might be aware of being aware is offered as a more meaningful distinction. A framework is presented which can be used to make a determination about the extent to which other species have experiences similar to ours based on their ability to make inferences and attributions about mental states in others. The evidence from both humans and animals is consistent with the idea that the capacity to use experience to infer the experience of others is a byproduct of self-awareness.
|
|
|
|
de Waal, F. B. M. (2005). How animals do business. Sci Am, 292(4), 54–61.
|
|
|
|
Fremouw, T., Herbranson, W. T., & Shimp, C. P. (2002). Dynamic shifts of pigeon local/global attention. Anim. Cogn., 5(4), 233–243.
Abstract: It has previously been shown that pigeons can shift attention between parts and wholes of complex stimuli composed of larger, “global” characters constructed from smaller, “local” characters. The base-rate procedure used biased target level within any condition at either the local or global level; targets were more likely at one level than at the other. Biasing of target level in this manner demonstrated shifts of local/global attention over a time span consisting of several days with a fixed base rate. Experiment 1 examined the possibility that pigeons can shift attention between local and global levels of perceptual analysis in seconds rather than days. The experiment used priming cues the color of which predicted on a trial-by-trial basis targets at different perceptual levels. The results confirmed that pigeons, like humans, can display highly dynamic stimulus-driven shifts of local/global attention. Experiment 2 changed spatial relations between features of priming cues and features of targets within a task otherwise similar to that used in experiment 1. It was predicted that this change in cues might affect asymmetry but not the occurrence of a priming effect. A priming effect was again obtained, thereby providing generality to the claim that pigeons can learn that trial-by-trial primes predict targets at different levels of perceptual analysis. Pigeons can display perceptual, stimulus-driven priming of a highly dynamic nature.
|
|
|
|
Plotnik, J. M., de Waal, F. B. M., & Reiss, D. (2006). Self-recognition in an Asian elephant. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A., 103(45), 17053–17057.
Abstract: Considered an indicator of self-awareness, mirror self-recognition (MSR) has long seemed limited to humans and apes. In both phylogeny and human ontogeny, MSR is thought to correlate with higher forms of empathy and altruistic behavior. Apart from humans and apes, dolphins and elephants are also known for such capacities. After the recent discovery of MSR in dolphins (Tursiops truncatus), elephants thus were the next logical candidate species. We exposed three Asian elephants (Elephas maximus) to a large mirror to investigate their responses. Animals that possess MSR typically progress through four stages of behavior when facing a mirror: (i) social responses, (ii) physical inspection (e.g., looking behind the mirror), (iii) repetitive mirror-testing behavior, and (iv) realization of seeing themselves. Visible marks and invisible sham-marks were applied to the elephants' heads to test whether they would pass the litmus “mark test” for MSR in which an individual spontaneously uses a mirror to touch an otherwise imperceptible mark on its own body. Here, we report a successful MSR elephant study and report striking parallels in the progression of responses to mirrors among apes, dolphins, and elephants. These parallels suggest convergent cognitive evolution most likely related to complex sociality and cooperation.
|
|
|
|
Gilbert, B. K., & Hailman, J. P. (1966). Uncertainty of leadership-rank in fallow deer. Nature, 209(5027), 1041–1042.
|
|
|
|
Byrne, R. W., & Bates, L. A. (2006). Why are animals cognitive? Curr Biol, 16(12), R445–8.
|
|
|
|
Hamilton, W. D. (1971). Geometry for the selfish herd. J. Theor. Biol., 31(2), 295–311.
Abstract: This paper presents an antithesis to the view that gregarious behaviour is evolved through benefits to the population or species. Following Galton (1871) and Williams (1964) gregarious behaviour is considered as a form of cover-seeking in which each animal tries to reduce its chance of being caught by a predator.
It is easy to see how pruning of marginal individuals can maintain centripetal instincts in already gregarious species; some evidence that marginal pruning actually occurs is summarized. Besides this, simply defined models are used to show that even in non-gregarious species selection is likely to favour individuals who stay close to others.
Although not universal or unipotent, cover-seeking is a widespread and important element in animal aggregation, as the literature shows. Neglect of the idea has probably followed from a general disbelief that evolution can be dysgenic for a species. Nevertheless, selection theory provides no support for such disbelief in the case of species with outbreeding or unsubdivided populations.
The model for two dimensions involves a complex problem in geometrical probability which has relevance also in metallurgy and communication science. Some empirical data on this, gathered from random number plots, is presented as of possible heuristic value.
|
|
|
|
Hoy, R. (2005). Animal awareness: The (un)binding of multisensory cues in decision making by animals. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A., 102(7), 2267–2268.
|
|
|
|
Madigan, J. E., Kortz, G., Murphy, C., & Rodger, L. (1995). Photic headshaking in the horse: 7 cases. Equine Vet J, 27(4), 306–311.
Abstract: Seven horses with headshaking are described. No physical abnormalities were detected in any of the cases. Six of these horses had onset of clinical signs in the spring. The role of light was assessed by application of a blindfold or dark grey lens to the eyes, covering the eyes with a face mask and observing the horse in total darkness outdoors. Cessation of headshaking was observed with blindfolding (5/5 horses), night darkness outdoors (4/4 horses) and use of grey lenses (2/3 horses). Outdoor behaviour suggested efforts to avoid light in 4/4 cases. The photic sneeze in man is suggested as a putative mechanism for equine headshaking. Five of 7 horses had improvement with cyproheptadine treatment (0.3 mg/kg bwt b.i.d.). Headshaking developed within 2 calendar weeks of the same date for 3 consecutive years in one horse. Neuropharmacological alterations associated with photoperiod mechanisms leading to optic trigeminal summation are suggested as possible reasons for spring onset of headshaking.
|
|
|
|
Madigan, J. E., & Bell, S. A. (2001). Owner survey of headshaking in horses. J Am Vet Med Assoc, 219(3), 334–337.
Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To determine signalment, history, clinical signs, duration, seasonality, and response to various treatments reported by owners for headshaking in horses. DESIGN: Owner survey. ANIMALS: 109 horses with headshaking. PROCEDURE: Owners of affected horses completed a survey questionnaire. RESULTS: 78 affected horses were geldings, 29 were mares, and 2 were stallions. Mean age of onset was 9 years. Headshaking in 64 horses had a seasonal component, and for most horses, headshaking began in spring and ceased in late summer or fall. The most common clinical signs were shaking the head in a vertical plane, acting like an insect was flying up the nostril, snorting excessively, rubbing the muzzle on objects, having an anxious expression while headshaking, worsening of clinical signs with exposure to sunlight, and improvement of clinical signs at night. Treatment with antihistamines, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, corticosteroids, antimicrobials, fly control, chiropractic, and acupuncture had limited success. Sixty-one horses had been treated with cyproheptadine; 43 had moderate to substantial improvement. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Headshaking may have many causes. A large subset of horses have similar clinical signs including shaking the head in a vertical plane, acting as if an insect were flying up the nostrils, and rubbing the muzzle on objects. Seasonality and worsening of clinical signs with exposure to light are also common features of this syndrome. Geldings and Thoroughbreds appear to be overrepresented. Cyproheptadine treatment was beneficial in more than two thirds of treated horses.
|
|
