Dogs choose a human informant: Metacognition in canines

McMahon, Shannon A.; Macpherson, Krista; Roberts, William A.

doi:10.1016/j.beproc.2010.07.014

Cited by 40 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The results of the McMahon et al (2010) experiments are similar to the information seeking rat experiments that we conducted. Although dogs did not discover the re-orienting response necessary to view the correct rotated box in the initial experiment, they did choose the correct cue (person) that provided information about the correct response when they were required to make a forced choice.…”

Section: Train Testsupporting

confidence: 72%

“…At 45°, the white face could be seen from the starting position used in training, and dogs continued to choose the white box significantly above chance. At 90° and 135° rotation, however, dogs were no longer statistically better Roberts, 2010, Behavioural Processes, 85, p. 295. Copyright 2010 by Elsevier.…”

Section: Information Seeking In Dogsmentioning

confidence: 94%

Section: Information Seeking In Honeybees?mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Information Seeking in Animals: Metacognition?

Roberts¹,

McMillan²,

Musolino³

et al. 2012

CCBR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Metacognition refers to humans' ability to monitor the state of their own learning and to judge the correctness of information retrieved from memory. Inferences about metacognition-like processes in non-human animals have been made from studies in which subjects judge the adequacy of previously presented information and from information seeking studies in which no prior knowledge exists. This article briefly reviews the former type of experiments but focuses on studies of information seeking. A number of studies now indicate that apes and monkeys will look down opaque tubes or under opaque containers to see the location of a hidden reward. They less often make looking responses when other information indicates the location of reward, such as visible baiting, transparent tubes or containers, or logical inference. Studies of information seeking in pigeons, rats, and dogs are reported that indicate they do not readily show the types of looking responses seen in primates. If given a forced choice between stimuli that do and do not yield information about the location of reward, however, these non-primates make the informative choice. It is suggested that the choice of information in these pigeon, rat, and dog experiments may be a form of secondary sign-tracking and thus different from the metacognition-like processes used by primates.

show abstract

Section: Train Testsupporting

confidence: 72%

Section: Information Seeking In Dogsmentioning

confidence: 94%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Information Seeking in Animals: Metacognition?

Roberts¹,

McMillan²,

Musolino³

et al. 2012

CCBR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…If animals opt out more on difficult than easy tasks, if opting out improves performance on difficult tasks, and if they can apply the opt-out strategy to a novel task, then this has been taken as evidence that animals can modify their decision-making strategy based on their degree of uncertainty. This result has been reported for nonhuman primates, dolphins, dogs, and rats (3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8)(9)(10)(11)(12). However, some strongly argue that all comparative studies using opt-out paradigms can be explained through associative mechanisms that do not require judgments of uncertainty (3,(13)(14)(15).…”

mentioning

confidence: 58%

Honey bees selectively avoid difficult choices

Perry

Barron

2013

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

120

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human decision-making strategies are strongly influenced by an awareness of certainty or uncertainty (a form of metacognition) to increase the chances of making a right choice. Humans seek more information and defer choosing when they realize they have insufficient information to make an accurate decision, but whether animals are aware of uncertainty is currently highly contentious. To explore this issue, we examined how honey bees (Apis mellifera) responded to a visual discrimination task that varied in difficulty between trials. Free-flying bees were rewarded for a correct choice, punished for an incorrect choice, or could avoid choosing by exiting the trial (opting out). Bees opted out more often on difficult trials, and opting out improved their proportion of successful trials. Bees could also transfer the concept of opting out to a novel task. Our data show that bees selectively avoid difficult tasks they lack the information to solve. This finding has been considered as evidence that nonhuman animals can assess the certainty of a predicted outcome, and bees' performance was comparable to that of primates in a similar paradigm. We discuss whether these behavioral results prove bees react to uncertainty or whether associative mechanisms can explain such findings. To better frame metacognition as an issue for neurobiological investigation, we propose a neurobiological hypothesis of uncertainty monitoring based on the known circuitry of the honey bee brain.O ften a correct choice can only be estimated rather than absolutely known. To aid in this estimation, humans are able to monitor their degree of uncertainty and use that knowledge to improve their decisions (1, 2). The ability to monitor one's own cognitive processes is considered a form of metacognition (1, 2). When uncertain, humans will often defer choosing and seek more information rather than risk the consequences of a wrong choice. Whether the ability to monitor uncertainty exists in nonhuman animals is currently highly contentious. Smith et al. (3,4) developed the opt-out paradigm to test uncertainty monitoring in animals in which an animal must solve a discrimination task that varies in difficulty. The animal is rewarded when correct and punished for an incorrect choice. A third option is then introduced where the animal can "opt out" by responding in some different way to avoid the discrimination task, thereby usually beginning a new trial. If animals opt out more on difficult than easy tasks, if opting out improves performance on difficult tasks, and if they can apply the opt-out strategy to a novel task, then this has been taken as evidence that animals can modify their decision-making strategy based on their degree of uncertainty. This result has been reported for nonhuman primates, dolphins, dogs, and rats (3-12). However, some strongly argue that all comparative studies using opt-out paradigms can be explained through associative mechanisms that do not require judgments of uncertainty (3,(13)(14)(15).Because two alternative mechanisms have be...

show abstract

“…Capuchin monkeys will redundantly peer into translucent or bent tubes to try and confirm a rewards location (Paukner et al 2006). Similarly, dogs will use experimenter cues to seek information but do not ''check'' spontaneously (Brauer et al 2004;McMahon et al 2010), and pigeons will respond at random (Roberts et al 2009). In computerized versions of the paradigm in which ''hints'' are available for memorized pictures, eight rhesus macaques transferred hint-seeking behavior to a novel task (Beran and Smith 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and human children (Homo sapiens) know when they are ignorant about the location of food

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the last decade, the metacognitive abilities of nonhuman primates and the developmental emergence of metacognition in children have become topics of increasing research interest. In the current study, the performance of three adult chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes; Experiment 1) and forty-four 3.5- and 5.5-year-old human children (Experiment 2) was assessed on a behavioral search paradigm designed to assess metacognition. Subjects either directly observed the baiting of a large reward into one cup among an array of four, or had the baiting occluded from their view. In half of the trials, subjects were also presented with an additional distinctive cup that was always visibly baited with a small reward. This cup allowed subjects the opportunity to escape from making a guess about the location of the bigger reward. All three chimpanzees and both age groups of children selected the escape cup more often when the baiting of the large reward was concealed, compared to when it was visible. This demonstrates that both species can selectively choose a guaranteed smaller reward when they do not know the location of a larger reward and provides insight into the development of metacognition.

show abstract

Dogs choose a human informant: Metacognition in canines

Cited by 40 publications

References 26 publications

Information Seeking in Animals: Metacognition?

Information Seeking in Animals: Metacognition?

Honey bees selectively avoid difficult choices

Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and human children (Homo sapiens) know when they are ignorant about the location of food

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About