Stability of the guinea pigs personality – cognition – linkage over time

Brust, Vera; Guenther, Anja

doi:10.1016/j.beproc.2016.06.009

Cited by 19 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some examples of repeatability estimates suggest that children show good test-retest reliability on false-belief tasks used to assess theory-of-mind [25,34]. Consistent individual differences in performance on cognitive tasks have also been documented in a few nonhuman animals, such as guinea pigs, Cavia aperea f. porcellus [35,36], zebra finch, Taenopigya guttata [37], Australian magpies, Gymnorhina tibicen [15], mountain chickadees, Poecile gambeli [38], bumblebees, Bombus terrestris [39], and snails, Lymnaea stagnalis [40]. While the paucity of repeatability measures of cognitive performance may stem from the recency of interest in the evolutionary ecology of cognitive traits [41,42], it may also suggest that it is difficult to accurately capture repeatable measures of cognitive ability [43].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

The repeatability of cognitive performance: a meta-analysis

Cauchoix

Chow

Horik

et al. 2018

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

134

146

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Behavioural and cognitive processes play important roles in mediating an individual's interactions with its environment. Yet, while there is a vast literature on repeatable individual differences in behaviour, relatively little is known about the repeatability of cognitive performance. To further our understanding of the evolution of cognition, we gathered 44 studies on individual performance of 25 species across six animal classes and used meta-analysis to assess whether cognitive performance is repeatable. We compared repeatability () in performance (1) on the same task presented at different times (temporal repeatability), and (2) on different tasks that measured the same putative cognitive ability (contextual repeatability). We also addressed whether estimates were influenced by seven extrinsic factors (moderators): type of cognitive performance measurement, type of cognitive task, delay between tests, origin of the subjects, experimental context, taxonomic class and publication status. We found support for both temporal and contextual repeatability of cognitive performance, with mean estimates ranging between 0.15 and 0.28. Repeatability estimates were mostly influenced by the type of cognitive performance measures and publication status. Our findings highlight the widespread occurrence of consistent inter-individual variation in cognition across a range of taxa which, like behaviour, may be associated with fitness outcomes.This article is part of the theme issue 'Causes and consequences of individual differences in cognitive abilities'.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

The repeatability of cognitive performance: a meta-analysis

Cauchoix

Chow

Horik

et al. 2018

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

134

146

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Laboratory studies on mice indicate that measures of spatial learning, such as latency and error to reach the goal during training, are intercorrelated and consistently variable between individuals across time (Locurto & Scanlon, 1998;Locurto, Benoit, Crowley, & Miele, 2006). More recently, repeatability in learning speed of discrimination tasks has been shown for guinea pigs (Brust & Guenther, 2017).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Personality effects on spatial learning: Comparisons between visual conditions in a weakly electric fish

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent research has explored links between cognition and personality, with prominent hypotheses proposing that personality drives consistent individual differences in cognitive function. These hypotheses particularly expect bolder individuals to be faster, but less accurate, as a trade‐off in cognitive function. However, cognitive processes are typically interconnected and defined in more complex terms than simply speed and accuracy. Here, we present evidence that personality‐based differences in learning rates are a result of differences in decision‐making during training in a two‐alternative forced‐choice spatial memory task. This was examined in the mormyrid fish Gnathonemus petersii in the presence of light, where both vision and the electric sense are available, and in the dark, where visibility is limited and fish rely mostly on electrosensing. The species is adapted for the dark to avoid visual predators; thus, the presence of light can induce high‐risk and the dark low‐risk. We show that light conditions had little effect on learning, with bolder fish learning faster both in the light and in the dark conditions. Yet the relationship between learning rates and error rates indicates that the effect on learning is indirectly influenced by accuracy during training. Speed‐accuracy trade‐offs were not found in decision‐making, with bolder individuals deciding faster and more accurately both in the light and in the dark. Only learning strategy was affected by light conditions, with significantly more fish preferring response to place learning in the dark than in the light, where distal cues were not visible. We conclude that other than effects from the integration of visual information, bolder individuals show a consistently greater tendency to explore and find food rewards during training. This affects their decision‐making and in turn their learning performance. We highlight the complexity by which personality‐based effects are exhibited in spatial associative learning.

show abstract

“…The study was carried out at the facilities of the Bunnies & Beyond Rabbit Rescue at Petsmart Flatiron in New York City. Following the protocol presented by Brust and Guenther (2017), a sample size of 15 individuals (9 females and 6 males) were tested to detect correlations between personality traits and cognition (Bell et al, 2009). The animals tested were adult rabbits of different breeds and ages that live individually or as bonded pairs.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In recent years, many studies have explored how the personalities of domesticated animals differ from those of their wild counterparts (Range, Möslinger, & Virányi, 2012; Benhaim et al, 2013; Kaiser et al, 2015; Marino, 2015; Griffin, Guillette, & Healy, 2016; Brust & Guenther, 2017). Personality in non-human animals is defined as behavioral differences between individuals that are consistent over time and/or contexts (Carter et al, 2013; Biro & Stamps, 2008, Evans Ogden, 2012; Wolf & Weissing, 2012; Mackay & Haskell 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Consistency in total variation in personality traits within an individual is usually reported as repeatability (Falconer, 1981; Boake, 1989; Guenther & Brust, 2017). We then tested for a relationship between personality and cognition, following the methods of a study of guinea pigs by Brust & Guenther (2017). We made two predictions: that personality traits would exhibit considerable between-individual variation, and that bolder and more exploratory individuals would perform better in cognitive tasks than their shier and less exploratory conspecifics.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Relationship between personality and cognitive traits in domestic rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus)

Clavel

Youngblood

Lahti³

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Domestication is the process by which species adapt to, and are artificially selected for, human-made environments. Few studies have explored how the process of domestication has affected the connection between behavioral traits and cognitive abilities in animals. This study investigated the relationship between personality and cognitive traits in domestic rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus). Fifteen individuals kept in a rabbit rescue facility were tested over a period of two months. We measured the linkage between behavioral traits (response to a novel object and exploration time) and cognitive performance. Our results suggest that there is no relationship between personality traits and problem solving abilities in domestic rabbits. In addition, our results suggest that exploration time is significantly repeatable at the individual level while latency to approach a novel object is not. Thus further research is needed to explore the relationship between cognitive and personality traits in domestic rabbits.

show abstract

Stability of the guinea pigs personality – cognition – linkage over time

Cited by 19 publications

References 53 publications

The repeatability of cognitive performance: a meta-analysis

The repeatability of cognitive performance: a meta-analysis

Personality effects on spatial learning: Comparisons between visual conditions in a weakly electric fish

Relationship between personality and cognitive traits in domestic rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About