Abstract: Summary Spatial orientation has played an extremely important role in the development of ideas about the behavioral capacities of animals. Indeed, as the modern scientific study of animal behavior emerged from its roots in zoology and experimental psychology, studies of spatial orientation figured in the work of many of the pioneering researchers, including Tinbergen (), von ), Watson () and .

Abstract: Summary In this chapter I want to stand back from the splendid empirical work on animal cognitive capacities that is the focus of this book, and look at the broader context of cognitive concerns within which the work can be viewed. Indeed even the term `cognitive ethology' currently connotes and denotes more than is represented here, as other collections of articles, such as and , exemplify. I include the current descendants of behavioristic learning theory, evolutionary epistemology, evolutionary psychology and the recent comparative turn that has been taken in cognitive science. These several approaches, despite their considerable overlap, often appear independent and even ignorant of one another. Like the proverbial blind men feeling the hide of an elephant, they touch hands from time to time, yet collectively have only a piecemeal and distributed understanding of the shape of the whole. Although each approach may indeed need the space to work out its own conceptual and methodological preoccupations without confounding interference from other views, a utopian spirit envisages an ultimate coming together, a more comprehensive realization of the synthetic approach to animal cognition that is this book's theme.

Abstract: At the beginning of the twentieth century, behaviourists like John B. Watson (1878-1958) changed the focus of attention from the inside of the brain (mentalism and introspection then being the main trend in psychology at the time) to the outside (Watson, 1913). They believed that we could learn nearly everything about animals and humans by studying their performance in learning experiments, and this was both measurable and verifiable. Today in the first decade of the twenty-first century, there has been a return to the inside. The neurosciences seek physiological explanations and connections between external behaviour and the neural mechanisms within the nervous system. With the revolution in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) technology researchers are now able to visually represent neural activity. Other researchers have developed mathematical models and programs to visualise the patterns created in the periphery prior to central integration The author in this paper would like to distinguish these descriptive forms of representation from actual representations, i.e., those of which the animal is actually aware or conscious. Why does an animal sometimes make perceptual mistakes? (Case Study I “The Turtle and the Plastic Bag”). Is there more to dispositions? (Case Study II: “Taking Representation for a Walk. Argos and the Fake Daniel Dennett”). How is prey represented to an animal? (Case Study III “Representation of Prey in the Jellyfish/Herring Predator-Prey Dyad”). Does a simple animal feel pain or suffer? (Case Study IV: A Can of Worms. The Earthworm as Bait) It will be argued on the basis of contemporary biosemiotic research that animals (including both vertebrates and invertebrates) represent environmental information internally, and these representations can be subdivided into i.) primary or peripheral representation and ii.) central representation which are quantitative and qualitative respectively. Sensory information is conveyed via signals, these are received as stimuli then transduced into internal signals (see Theoretical Framework). At this stage the animal is not aware of the quality of the information as it has not yet been integrated or processed in a ganglionic complex. One can describe the properties of this pre-integrated information as quantitative and syntactical i.e., spatial and temporal ordering of incoming signals and their relations. The sign which is the smallest unit of qualitative representation arises only after integration of information from two or more discrete sensory modalities. These findings have repercussions for current models of animal learning and behaviour, especially in lower invertebrates (the principal subject of this paper); they also challenge the development of robots based on so-called simple systems

Abstract: Abstract  Relational learning, as opposed to perceptual learning, is based on the abstract properties of the stimuli. Although at present there is no doubt that pigeons are capable of relational behavior, this study aims to further disclose the conditions under which it occurs. Pigeons were trained in an outdoor cage on a matching-to-sample or an oddity-from-sample task, with colored cardboard stimuli presented horizontally. The apparatus involved three sliding lids on which the stimuli were drawn and which, when displaced, revealed the reinforcement. The lids were either adjacent to each other or somewhat separated. Training sessions involved two colors, and test sessions six different colors (same dimension test), or six different shapes (different dimension test). One group of birds trained under the “adjacent” condition failed when tested with new stimuli, but succeeded in both dimension tests after training under the “separate” condition. Two other groups of birds succeeded in all tests after training under the latter condition. These results show that depending on procedural details, pigeons are or are not able to transfer from one visual dimension to another, thus extending previous related findings.