|
Köhler, W. (1921). Intelligenzprüfungen an Menschenaffen. Berlin: Springer.
|
|
Cowley, J. J., & Griesel, R. D. (1966). The effect on growth and behaviour of rehabilitating first and second generation low protein rats. Anim. Behav., 14(4), 506–517.
|
|
McClearn, G. E. (1971). Behavioral genetics. Behav Sci, 16(1), 64–81.
|
|
Cattell, R. B., & Korth, B. (1973). The isolation of temperament dimensions in dogs. Behav Biol, 9(1), 15–30.
|
|
Levy, J. (1977). The mammalian brain and the adaptive advantage of cerebral asymmetry. Ann N Y Acad Sci, 299, 264–272.
|
Boice, R. (1981). Behavioral comparability of wild and domesticated rats. Behav Genet, 11(5), 545–553.
Abstract: The oft-repeated concern for the lack of behavioral comparability of domestic rats with wild forms of Rattus norvegicus is unfounded. Laboratory rats appear to show the potential for all wild-type behaviors, including the most dramatic social postures. Moreover, domestics are capable of assuming a feral existence without difficulty, one where they readily behave in a fashion indistinguishable from wild rats. The one behavioral difference that is clearly established concerns performance in laboratory learning paradigms. The superiority of domestics in these laboratory tasks speaks more to quieting the concerns of degeneracy theorists than to problems of using domestic Norway rats as subjects representative of their species.
|
Wasserman, E. A. (1997). The science of animal cognition: past, present, and future. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process, 23(2), 123–135.
Abstract: The field of animal cognition is strongly rooted in the philosophy of mind and in the theory of evolution. Despite these strong roots, work during the most famous and active period in the history of our science-the 1930s, 1940s, and 1950s-may have diverted us from the very questions that were of greatest initial interest to the comparative analysis of learning and behavior. Subsequently, the field has been in steady decline despite its increasing breadth and sophistication. Renewal of the field of animal cognition may require a return to the original questions of animal communication and intelligence using the most advanced tools of modern psychological science. Reclaiming center stage in contemporary psychology will be difficult; planning that effort with a host of strategies should enhance the chances of success.
|
Jolly, A. (1998). Pair-bonding, female aggression and the evolution of lemur societies. Folia Primatol (Basel), 69 Suppl 1, 1–13.
Abstract: Lemur societies have been described as convergent with those of anthropoids, including Papio-like female-bonded multi-male groups. Recent research, however, shows at least 5 pair-bonded species among the Lemuridae and Indriidae. Three more, Eulemur mongoz, Eulemur fulvus and Varecia variegata, have societies combining aspects of pairing with aspects of troop life. The best-known female-bonded societies, those of Lemur catta, Propithecus diadema edwardsi and Propithecus verreauxi, may be assemblages of mother-daughter dyads, capable of high aggression towards other females, but derived from more solitary female ancestors, perhaps also living as pairs. The internal structure of such lemur groups differs from the more extensive kin groups of catarrhines. This in turn may relate to the lemurs' level of social intelligence and to lemur female dominance over males.
|
|
Pennisi, E. (1999). Are out primate cousins 'conscious'? (Vol. 284).
|
Sterling, E. J., & Povinelli, D. J. (1999). Tool use, aye-ayes, and sensorimotor intelligence. Folia Primatol (Basel), 70(1), 8–16.
Abstract: Humans, chimpanzees, capuchins and aye-ayes all display an unusually high degree of encephalization and diverse omnivorous extractive foraging. It has been suggested that the high degree of encephalization in aye-ayes may be the result of their diverse, omnivorous extractive foraging behaviors. In combination with certain forms of tool use, omnivorous extractive foraging has been hypothesized to be linked to higher levels of sensorimotor intelligence (stages 5 or 6). Although free-ranging aye-ayes have not been observed to use tools directly in the context of their extractive foraging activities, they have recently been reported to use lianas as tools in a manner that independently suggests that they may possess stage 5 or 6 sensorimotor intelligence. Although other primate species which display diverse, omnivorous extractive foraging have been tested for sensorimotor intelligence, aye-ayes have not. We report a test of captive aye-ayes' comprehension of tool use in a situation designed to simulate natural conditions. The results support the view that aye-ayes do not achieve stage 6 comprehension of tool use, but rather may use trial-and-error learning to develop tool-use behaviors. Other theories for aye-aye encephalization are considered.
|
