|
|
Nakagawa, S., & Waas, J. R. (2004). 'O sibling, where art thou?' – A review of avian sibling recognition with respect to the mammalian literature. Biological Reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 79(1), 101–119.
Abstract: Avian literature on sibling recognition is rare compared to that developed by mammalian researchers. We compare avian and mammalian research on sibling recognition to identify why avian work is rare, how approaches differ and what avian and mammalian researchers can learn from each other. Three factors: (1) biological differences between birds and mammals, (2) conceptual biases and (3) practical constraints, appear to influence our current understanding. Avian research focuses on colonial species because sibling recognition is considered adaptive where 'mixing potential' of dependent young is high; research on a wider range of species, breeding systems and ecological conditions is now needed. Studies of acoustic recognition cues dominate avian literature; other types of cues (e.g. visual, olfactory) deserve further attention. The effect of gender on avian sibling recognition has yet to be investigated; mammalian work shows that gender can have important influences. Most importantly, many researchers assume that birds recognise siblings through 'direct familiarisation' (commonly known as associative learning or familiarity); future experiments should also incorporate tests for 'indirect familiarisation' (commonly known as phenotype matching). If direct familiarisation proves crucial, avian research should investigate how periods of separation influence sibling discrimination. Mammalian researchers typically interpret sibling recognition in broad functional terms (nepotism, optimal outbreeding); some avian researchers more successfully identify specific and testable adaptive explanations, with greater relevance to natural contexts. We end by reporting exciting discoveries from recent studies of avian sibling recognition that inspire further interest in this topic.
|
|
|
|
Kaminski, J., Call, J., & Fischer, J. (2004). Word Learning in a Domestic Dog: Evidence for “Fast Mapping”. Science, 304(5677), 1682–1683.
Abstract: During speech acquisition, children form quick and rough hypotheses about the meaning of a new word after only a single exposure--a process dubbed “fast mapping.” Here we provide evidence that a border collie, Rico, is able to fast map. Rico knew the labels of over 200 different items. He inferred the names of novel items by exclusion learning and correctly retrieved those items right away as well as 4 weeks after the initial exposure. Fast mapping thus appears to be mediated by general learning and memory mechanisms also found in other animals and not by a language acquisition device that is special to humans.
|
|
|
|
Lefebvre, L., Reader, S. M., & Sol, D. (2004). Brains, Innovations and Evolution in Birds and Primates. Brain. Behav. Evol., 63(4), 233–246.
Abstract: Abstract
Several comparative research programs have focusedon the cognitive, life history and ecological traits thataccount for variation in brain size. We review one ofthese programs, a program that uses the reported frequencyof behavioral innovation as an operational measureof cognition. In both birds and primates, innovationrate is positively correlated with the relative size of associationareas in the brain, the hyperstriatum ventrale andneostriatum in birds and the isocortex and striatum inprimates. Innovation rate is also positively correlatedwith the taxonomic distribution of tool use, as well asinterspecific differences in learning. Some features ofcognition have thus evolved in a remarkably similar wayin primates and at least six phyletically-independent avianlineages. In birds, innovation rate is associated withthe ability of species to deal with seasonal changes in theenvironment and to establish themselves in new regions,and it also appears to be related to the rate atwhich lineages diversify. Innovation rate provides a usefultool to quantify inter-taxon differences in cognitionand to test classic hypotheses regarding the evolution ofthe brain.
|
|
|
|
De Sousa, R. (2004). Rational Animals. Croatian Journal of Philosophy, 4(12), 365–386.
Abstract: I begin with a rather unpromising dispute that Nozick once had with Ian Hacking in the pages of the London Review of Books, in which both vied with one another in their enthusiasm to repudiate the thesis that some human people or peoples are closer than others to animality. I shall attempt to show that one can build, on the basis of Nozick’s discussion of rationality, a defense of the view that the capacity for language places human rationality out of reach of a comparison with animals. The difference rests, paradoxi–cally, on the human capacity for irrationality. Irrationality depends on the capacity for language, which allows the detachment of explicit thoughts from their underlying dynamic implementation; these, in turn, condition the essential disputability of principles of rationality. That is what places every human potentially—if not actually—on the other side of an unbridge–able gulf that separates us from other animals.
|
|
|
|
Pack, A. A., & Herman, L. M. (2004). Bottlenosed Dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) Comprehend the Referent of Both Static and Dynamic Human Gazing and Pointing in an Object-Choice Task. J. Comp. Psychol., 118(2), 160–171.
Abstract: The authors tested 2 bottlenosed dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) for their understanding of human-directed gazing or pointing in a 2-alternative object-choice task. A dolphin watched a human informant either gazing at or pointing toward 1 of 2 laterally placed objects and was required to perform a previously indicated action to that object. Both static and dynamic gaze, as well as static and dynamic direct points and cross-body points, yielded errorless or nearly errorless performance. Gaze with the informant's torso obscured (only the head was shown) produced no performance decrement, but gaze with eyes only resulted in chance performance. The results revealed spontaneous understanding of human gaze accomplished through head orientation, with or without the human informant's eyes obscured, and demonstrated that gaze-directed cues were as effective as point-directed cues in the object-choice task. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2009 APA, all rights reserved)
|
|
|
|
Bräuer, J., Call, J., & Tomasello, M. (2004). Visual perspective taking in dogs (Canis familiaris) in the presence of barriers. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 88(3-4), 299–317.
Abstract: Previous studies have shown that dogs have developed a special sensitivity to the communicative signals and attentional states of humans. The aim of the current study was to further investigate what dogs know about the visual perception of humans and themselves. In the first two experiments we investigated whether dogs were sensitive to the properties of barriers as blocking the visual access of humans. We presented dogs with a situation in which a human forbade them to take a piece of food, but the type and orientation of the barrier allowed the dog to take the food undetected in some conditions. Dogs differentiated between effective and ineffective barriers, based on their orientation or the particular features of the barriers such as size or the presence of window. In the third study we investigated whether dogs know about what they themselves have seen. We presented subjects with two boxes and placed food in one of them. In the Seen condition the location of the food was shown to the dogs while in the Unseen condition dogs were prevented from seeing the destination of the food. Before selecting one of the boxes by pressing a lever, dogs had the opportunity to seek extra information regarding the contents of the boxes, which would be particularly useful in the condition in which they had not seen where the food was hidden. Dogs rarely used the opportunity to seek information about the contents of the box before making their choice in any condition. Therefore, we found no evidence suggesting that dogs have access to what they themselves have seen, which contrasts with the positive evidence about visual perspective taking in others from the first two experiments and previous studies.
|
|
|
|
Griffiths, S. W., Brockmark, S., Höjesjö, J., & Johnsson, J. I. (2004). Coping with divided attention: the advantage of familiarity. Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci., 271(1540), 695–699.
Abstract: The ability of an animal to perform a task successfully is limited by the amount of attention being simultaneously focused on other activities. One way in which individuals might reduce the cost of divided attention is by preferentially focusing on the most beneficial tasks. In territorial animals where aggression is lower among familiar individuals, the decision to associate preferentially with familiar conspecifics may therefore confer advantages by allowing attention to be switched from aggression to predator vigilance and feeding. Wild juvenile brown trout were used to test the prediction that familiar fishes respond more quickly than unfamiliar fishes to a simulated predator attack. Our results confirm this prediction by demonstrating that familiar trout respond 14% faster than unfamiliar individuals to a predator attack. The results also show that familiar fishes consume a greater number of food items, foraging at more than twice the rate of unfamiliar conspecifics. To the best of our knowledge, these results provide the first evidence that familiarity–biased association confers advantages through the immediate fitness benefits afforded by faster predator–evasion responses and the long–term benefits provided by increased feeding opportunities.
|
|
|
|
Bugnyar, T., Stöwe, M., & Heinrich, B. (2004). Ravens, Corvus corax, follow gaze direction of humans around obstacles. Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci., 271(1546), 1331–1336.
Abstract: The ability to follow gaze (i.e. head and eye direction) has recently been shown for social mammals, particularly primates. In most studies, individuals could use gaze direction as a behavioural cue without understanding that the view of others may be different from their own. Here, we show that hand–raised ravens not only visually co–orient with the look–ups of a human experimenter but also reposition themselves to follow the experimenter's gaze around a visual barrier. Birds were capable of visual co–orientation already as fledglings but consistently tracked gaze direction behind obstacles not before six months of age. These results raise the possibility that sub–adult and adult ravens can project a line of sight for the other person into the distance. To what extent ravens may attribute mental significance to the visual behaviour of others is discussed.
|
|
|
|
Milo, R., Itzkovitz, S., Kashtan, N., Levitt, R., & Alon, U. (2004). Response to Comment on “Network Motifs: Simple Building Blocks of Complex Networks” and “Superfamilies of Evolved and Designed Networks”. Science, 305(5687), 1107d.
|
|
|
|
Milo, R., Itzkovitz, S., Kashtan, N., Levitt, R., Shen-Orr, S., Ayzenshtat, I., et al. (2004). Superfamilies of Evolved and Designed Networks. Science, 303(5663), 1538–1542.
Abstract: Complex biological, technological, and sociological networks can be of very different sizes and connectivities, making it difficult to compare their structures. Here we present an approach to systematically study similarity in the local structure of networks, based on the significance profile (SP) of small subgraphs in the network compared to randomized networks. We find several superfamilies of previously unrelated networks with very similar SPs. One superfamily, including transcription networks of microorganisms, represents “rate-limited” information-processing networks strongly constrained by the response time of their components. A distinct superfamily includes protein signaling, developmental genetic networks, and neuronal wiring. Additional superfamilies include power grids, protein-structure networks and geometric networks, World Wide Web links and social networks, and word-adjacency networks from different languages.
|
|
