The Tower of London (ToL) test is widely used for measuring planning and aspects of problem solving. The primary focus of this study was to asses the relationship among different measures on the ToL. A secondary purpose was to examine the putative relationship between intelligence and working memory with that of ToL performance. Analyses of the interrelation of several ToL parameters indicated that better ToL performance was associated with longer preplanning time and shorter movement execution time. Good performers showed a stronger increase in preplanning duration with task difficulty then intermediate or poor planners. Stepwise multiple regression analysis yield fluid intelligence as the only significant predictor of ToL performance. These result suggest that the Tower of London assesses predominantly planning and problem solving and could not be explained by other cognitive domains.

Human performance in task-switching paradigms is seen as a hallmark of executive-control processes: switching between tasks induces switch costs (such that performance when changing from Task A to Task B is worse than on trials where the task repeats), which is generally attributed to executive control suppressing one task-set and activating the other. However, even in cases where task-sets are not employed, as well as in computational modeling of task switching, switch costs can still be found. This observation has led to the hypothesis that associative-learning processes might be responsible for all or part of the switch costs in task-switching paradigms. To test which cognitive processes contribute to the presence of task-switch costs, pigeons performed two different tasks on the same set of stimuli in rapid alternation. The pigeons showed no sign of switch costs, even though performance on Trial N was influenced by Trial N - 1, showing that they were sensitive to sequential effects. Using Pearce's (1987) model for stimulus generalization, we conclude that they learned the task associatively-in particular, a form of Pavlovian-conditioned approach was involved-and that this was responsible for the lack of any detectable switch costs. Pearce's model also allows us to make interferences about the common occurrence of switch costs in the absence of task-sets in human participants and in computational models, in that they are likely due to instrumental learning and the establishment of an equivalence between cues signaling the same task.

Inhibitory control enables subjects to quickly react to unexpectedly changing external demands. We assessed the ability of young (8 weeks old) pheasants Phasianus colchicus to exert inhibitory control in a novel response-inhibition task that required subjects to adjust their movement in space in pursuit of a reward across changing target locations. The difference in latencies between trials in which the target location did and did not change, the distance travelled towards the initially indicated location after a change occurred, and the change-signal reaction time provided a consistent measure that could be indicative of a pheasant’s inhibitory control. Between individuals, there was a great variability in these measures; these differences were not correlated with motivation either to access the reward or participate in the test. However, individuals that were slower to reach rewards in trials when the target did not change exhibited evidence of stronger inhibitory control, as did males and small individuals. This novel test paradigm offers a potential assay of inhibitory control that utilises a natural feature of an animal’s behavioural repertoire, likely common to a wide range of species, specifically their ability to rapidly alter their trajectory when reward locations switch.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s10071-017-1120-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

No abstract