|
Pennisi, E. (2006). Animal cognition. Man's best friend(s) reveal the possible roots of social intelligence (Vol. 312).
|
|
Pennisi, E. (2006). Animal cognition. Social animals prove their smarts (Vol. 312).
|
|
Pennisi, E. (1999). Are out primate cousins 'conscious'? (Vol. 284).
|
|
Pennisi, E. (1997). Schizophrenia clues from monkeys (Vol. 277).
|
|
Pinker, S. (1999). COGNITION:Enhanced: Out of the Minds of Babes. Science, 283(5398), 40–41.
|
|
Premack D, & Woodruff G. (1978). Chimpanzee problem-solving: a test for comprehension. Science, 202(3), 532.
|
Real, L. A. (1991). Animal choice behavior and the evolution of cognitive architecture. Science, 253(5023), 980–986.
Abstract: Animals process sensory information according to specific computational rules and, subsequently, form representations of their environments that form the basis for decisions and choices. The specific computational rules used by organisms will often be evolutionarily adaptive by generating higher probabilities of survival, reproduction, and resource acquisition. Experiments with enclosed colonies of bumblebees constrained to foraging on artificial flowers suggest that the bumblebee's cognitive architecture is designed to efficiently exploit floral resources from spatially structured environments given limits on memory and the neuronal processing of information. A non-linear relationship between the biomechanics of nectar extraction and rates of net energetic gain by individual bees may account for sensitivities to both the arithmetic mean and variance in reward distributions in flowers. Heuristic rules that lead to efficient resource exploitation may also lead to subjective misperception of likelihoods. Subjective probability formation may then be viewed as a problem in pattern recognition subject to specific sampling schemes and memory constraints.
|
Rosati, A. G. (2017). Foraging Cognition: Reviving the Ecological Intelligence Hypothesis. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 21(9), 691–702.
Abstract: What are the origins of intelligent behavior? The demands associated with living in complex social groups have been the favored explanation for the evolution of primate cognition in general and human cognition in particular. However, recent comparative research indicates that ecological variation can also shape cognitive abilities. I synthesize the emerging evidence that ?foraging cognition? ? skills used to exploit food resources, including spatial memory, decision-making, and inhibitory control ? varies adaptively across primates. These findings provide a new framework for the evolution of human cognition, given our species? dependence on costly, high-value food resources. Understanding the origins of the human mind will require an integrative theory accounting for how humans are unique in both our sociality and our ecology.
|
Rowe, M. L., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (2009). Differences in Early Gesture Explain SES Disparities in Child Vocabulary Size at School Entry. Science, 323(5916), 951–953.
Abstract: Children from low-socioeconomic status (SES) families, on average, arrive at school with smaller vocabularies than children from high-SES families. In an effort to identify precursors to, and possible remedies for, this inequality, we videotaped 50 children from families with a range of different SES interacting with parents at 14 months and assessed their vocabulary skills at 54 months. We found that children from high-SES families frequently used gesture to communicate at 14 months, a relation that was explained by parent gesture use (with speech controlled). In turn, the fact that children from high-SES families have large vocabularies at 54 months was explained by children's gesture use at 14 months. Thus, differences in early gesture help to explain the disparities in vocabulary that children bring with them to school.
|
Sato, S., Sako, S., & Maeda, A. (1991). Social licking patterns in cattle (<em>Bos taurus</em>): influence of environmental and social factors. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 32(1), 3–12.
Abstract: To investigate the functions of social licking in cattle, four calves (one heifer and one steer in each of two herds), known to exhibit frequent social licking were observed continuously for 2 h before sunset for 13 days, using the focal animal sampling method. Calves were observed under various environmental conditions. Social licking significantly decreased on rainy days and tended to increase in a dirty barn and when food was restricted. Solicitation for social licking occurred not only from dominant animals of pairs but also from subordinates. Of the licking interactions, 31% occurred following solicitation, and these accounted for 39% of the total time spent licking. Following solicitation, 78% of social licking was oriented to the head and the neck regions that were inaccessible to self-licking animals. Unsolicited licking, however, was oriented not only to the head and the neck but also to the back and the rump regions, and these two latter regions were the major ones to receive licking. The effect of social relationships on social licking was investigated using least-squares analysis of variance. Social factors investigated were the difference of dominance values, the dominance-subordinance relationship, and kinship and familiarity; the sex of calves involved was also considered. Only familiarity had a significant effect on licking; exchanges of social licking increased with length of cohabitation. We suggest that social licking may have a cleaning effect, a tension-reducing effect and a bonding effect.
|
