The Highs and Lows of Theoretical Interpretation in Animal-Metacognition Research

Smith, J. David; Couchman, Justin J.; Beran, Michael J.

doi:10.1007/978-3-642-45190-4_5

Cited by 15 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This research area has faced some criticism that often appeals to Morgan’s Canon for constraining the interpretations of researchers in this area. However, Morgan’s Canon allows for interpretations at more complex levels when the data consistently support such interpretations across a wide range of independent tests (see Smith, Couchman, & Beran, 2012; Sober, 1998). For this reason, the present results, in relation to those from other tests with apes in different kinds of metacognition tests, and those with monkeys and other animals in metamemory tests and perceptual discrimination tasks, converge on the idea that animals share with humans the capacity for metacognitive monitoring.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Go when you know: Chimpanzees’ confidence movements reflect their responses in a computerized memory task

Beran¹,

Perdue²,

Futch³

et al. 2015

Cognition

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three chimpanzees performed a computerized memory task in which auditory feedback about the accuracy of each response was delayed. The delivery of food rewards for correct responses was also delayed and occurred in a separate location from the response. Crucially, if the chimpanzees did not move to the reward-delivery site before food was dispensed, the reward was lost and could not be recovered. Chimpanzees were significantly more likely to move to the dispenser on trials they had completed correctly than on those they had completed incorrectly, and these movements occurred before any external feedback about the outcome of their responses. Thus, chimpanzees moved (or not) on the basis of their confidence in their responses, and these confidence movements aligned closely with objective task performance. These untrained, spontaneous confidence judgments demonstrated that chimpanzees monitored their own states of knowing and not knowing and adjusted their behavior accordingly.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Go when you know: Chimpanzees’ confidence movements reflect their responses in a computerized memory task

Beran¹,

Perdue²,

Futch³

et al. 2015

Cognition

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These performances might be explained as low-level (reactive) conditioning phenomena if animals’ “uncertainty” responses are cued by stimuli or conditioned by reinforcement. The associative-metacognitive issue has dominated the theoretical debate (Basile & Hampton, 2014; Basile et al, 2015; Carruthers, 2008; Hampton, 2009; Jozefowiez, Staddon, & Cerutti, 2009a,b; Le Pelley, 2012, 2014; Smith, 2009; Smith, Beran, & Couchman, 2012; Smith, Beran, Couchman, & Coutinho, 2008; Smith, Couchman, & Beran, 2012, 2014a,b; Staddon, Jozefowiez, & Cerutti, 2007). It has dictated the form and application of formal models in this domain.…”

Section: Associative Cues and “Metacognitive” Performancesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Formal models in animal-metacognition research: the problem of interpreting animals’ behavior

2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ongoing research explores whether animals have precursors to metacognition—that is, the capacity to monitor mental states or cognitive processes. Comparative psychologists have tested apes, monkeys, rats, pigeons, and a dolphin using perceptual, memory, foraging, and information-seeking paradigms. The consensus is that some species have a functional analog to human metacognition. Recently, though, associative modelers have used formal-mathematical models hoping to describe animals’ “metacognitive” performances in associative-behaviorist ways. We evaluate these attempts to reify formal models as proof of particular explanations of animal cognition. These attempts misunderstand the content and proper application of models. They embody mistakes of scientific reasoning. They blur fundamental distinctions in understanding animal cognition. They impede theoretical development. In contrast, an energetic empirical enterprise is achieving strong success in describing the psychology underlying animals’ metacognitive performances. We argue that this careful empirical work is the clear path to useful theoretical development. The issues raised here about formal modeling—in the domain of animal metacognition—potentially extend to biobehavioral research more broadly.

show abstract

“…It could also illuminate animals’ reflective minds and their cognitive self-awareness. Animal metacognition is now an influential area within comparative psychology (reviews in Hampton, 2009; Kornell, 2009; Smith, Couchman, & Beran, 2012; Smith, Countinho, Boomer, & Beran, 2012). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Animal metacognition: A tale of two comparative psychologies.

Smith

Couchman

Beran

2014

Journal of Comparative Psychology

Self Cite

125

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A growing literature considers whether animals have capacities that are akin to human metacognition (i. e., humans’ capacity to monitor their states of uncertainty and knowing). Comparative psychologists have approached this question by testing a dolphin, pigeons, rats, monkeys and apes using perception, memory and food-concealment paradigms. As part of this consideration, some associative modelers have attempted to describe animals’ “metacognitive” performances in low-level, associative terms—an important goal if achievable. The authors summarize the empirical and theoretical situation regarding these associative descriptions. The associative descriptions in the animal-metacognition literature fail to encompass important phenomena. The sharp focus on abstract, mathematical associative models creates serious interpretative problems. The authors compare these failed associative descriptions to an alternative theoretical approach within contemporary comparative psychology. The alternative approach has the potential to strengthen comparative psychology as an empirical science and integrate it more fully within the mainstream of experimental psychology and cognitive science.

show abstract

The Highs and Lows of Theoretical Interpretation in Animal-Metacognition Research

Cited by 15 publications

References 50 publications

Go when you know: Chimpanzees’ confidence movements reflect their responses in a computerized memory task

Go when you know: Chimpanzees’ confidence movements reflect their responses in a computerized memory task

Formal models in animal-metacognition research: the problem of interpreting animals’ behavior

Animal metacognition: A tale of two comparative psychologies.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About