The highs and lows of theoretical interpretation in animal-metacognition research

被引:58
|
作者
Smith, J. David [1 ,2 ]
Couchman, Justin J. [3 ]
Beran, Michael J. [4 ]
机构
[1] SUNY Buffalo, Dept Psychol, Buffalo, NY 14260 USA
[2] SUNY Buffalo, Ctr Cognit Sci, Buffalo, NY 14260 USA
[3] SUNY Coll Fredonia, Dept Psychol, Fredonia, NY 14063 USA
[4] Georgia State Univ, Language Res Ctr, Decatur, GA 30034 USA
基金
美国国家科学基金会;
关键词
metacognition; uncertainty monitoring; metamemory; comparative cognition; decision-making; MONKEYS MACACA-MULATTA; UNCERTAINTY RESPONSES; REINFORCEMENT SIGNALS; MEMORY; METAMEMORY; HUMANS; INFORMATION; CONFIDENCE; AWARENESS; CONSCIOUSNESS;
D O I
10.1098/rstb.2011.0366
中图分类号
Q [生物科学];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
Humans feel uncertain. They know when they do not know. These feelings and the responses to them ground the research literature on metacognition. It is a natural question whether animals share this cognitive capacity, and thus animal metacognition has become an influential research area within comparative psychology. Researchers have explored this question by testing many species using perception and memory paradigms. There is an emerging consensus that animals share functional parallels with humans' conscious metacognition. Of course, this research area poses difficult issues of scientific inference. How firmly should we hold the line in insisting that animals' performances are low-level and associative? How high should we set the bar for concluding that animals share metacognitive capacities with humans? This area offers a constructive case study for considering theoretical problems that often confront comparative psychologists. The authors present this case study and address diverse issues of scientific judgement and interpretation within comparative psychology.
引用
收藏
页码:1297 / 1309
页数:13
相关论文
共 29 条