|
|
Pepperberg, I. M. (2002). Cognitive and Communicative Abilities of Grey Parrots. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci., 11(3), 83–87.
Abstract: Grey parrots (Psittacus erithacus) solve various cognitive tasks and acquire and use English speech in ways that often resemble those of very young children. Given that the psittacine brain is organized very differently from that of mammals, these results have intriguing implications for the study and evolution of vocal learning, communication, and cognition.
|
|
|
|
Ronald J. Schusterman, Colleen J. Reichmuth, & David Kastak. (2000). How Animals Classify Friends and Foes. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci., 9, 1–6.
|
|
|
|
J. David Smith, & David A. Washburn. (2005). Uncertainty Monitoring and Metacognition by Animals. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci., 14, 19–24.
|
|
|
|
Gosling, S. D., & John, O. P. (1999). Personality Dimensions in Nonhuman Animals: A Cross-Species Review. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci., 8(3), 69–75.
Abstract: The evolutionary continuity between humans and other animals suggests that some dimensions of personality may be common across a wide range of species. Unfortunately, there is no unified body of research on animal personality; studies are dispersed across multiple disciplines and diverse journals. To review 19 studies of personality factors in 12 nonhuman species, we used the human Five-Factor Model plus Dominance and Activity as a preliminary framework. Extraversion, Neuroticism, and Agreeableness showed the strongest cross-speciesgenerality, followed by Openness; a separate Conscientiousness dimension appeared only in chimpanzees, humans` closest relatives. Cross-species evidence was modest for a separate Dominance dimension but scant for Activity. The comparative approach taken here offers a fresh perspective on human personality and should facilitate hypothesis-driven research on the social and biological bases of personality.
|
|
|
|
Thomas R. Zentall. (1999). Animal Cognition: The Bridge BetweenAnimal Learning and Human Cognition. Psychological Science, 10, 206–208.
|
|
|
|
Daniel J. Povinelli, & Timothy J. Eddy. (2006). Chimpanzees: Joint Visual Attention. Psychol Sci, 7(3), 129–135.
Abstract: Gaze following is a behavior that draws the human infant into perceptual contact with objects or events in the world to which others are attending One interpretation of the development of this phenomenon is that it signals the emergence of joint or shared attention, which may be critical to the development of theory of mind An alternative interpretation is that gaze following is a noncognitive mechanism that exploits social stimuli in order to orient the infant (or adult) to important events in the world We report experimental results that chimpanzees display the effect in response to both movement of the head and eyes in concert and eve movement alone Additional tests indicate that chimpanzees appear able to (a) project an imaginary line of sight through invisible space and (b) understand How that line of sight can be impeded by solid, opaque objects This capacity may have arisen because of its reproductive payoffs in the context of social competition with conspecifics, predation avoidance, or both.
|
|
|
|
Beran, M. J., Smith, J. D., & Perdue, B. M. (2013). Language-Trained Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) Name What They Have Seen but Look First at What They Have Not Seen. Psychol Sci, .
Abstract: Metacognition can be defined as knowing what one knows, and the question of whether nonhuman animals are metacognitive has driven an intense debate. We tested 3 language-trained chimpanzees in an information-seeking task in which the identity of a food item was the critical piece of information needed to obtain the food. The chimpanzees could either report the identity of the food immediately or first check a container in which the food had been hidden. In two experiments, the chimpanzees were significantly more likely to visit the container first on trials in which they could not know its contents but were more likely to just name the food item without looking into the container on trials in which they had seen its contents. Thus, chimpanzees showed efficient information-seeking behavior that suggested they knew what they had or had not already seen when it was time to name a hidden item.
|
|
|
|
Clement, T. S., & Zentall, T. R. (2000). Development of a single-code/default coding strategy in pigeons. Psychol Sci, 11(3), 261–264.
Abstract: We tested the hypothesis that pigeons could use a cognitively efficient coding strategy by training them on a conditional discrimination (delayed symbolic matching) in which one alternative was correct following the presentation of one sample (one-to-one), whereas the other alternative was correct following the presentation of any one of four other samples (many-to-one). When retention intervals of different durations were inserted between the offset of the sample and the onset of the choice stimuli, divergent retention functions were found. With increasing retention interval, matching accuracy on trials involving any of the many-to-one samples was increasingly better than matching accuracy on trials involving the one-to-one sample. Furthermore, following this test, pigeons treated a novel sample as if it had been one of the many-to-one samples. The data suggest that rather than learning each of the five sample-comparison associations independently, the pigeons developed a cognitively efficient single-code/default coding strategy.
|
|
