Literature DB >> 25102928

Animal mindreading: what's the problem?

Cecilia Heyes1.   

Abstract

Research on mindreading in animals has the potential to address fundamental questions about the nature and origins of the human capacity to ascribe mental states, but it is a research programme that seems to be in trouble. Between 1978 and 2000 several groups used a range of methods, some with considerable promise, to ask whether animals can understand a variety of mental states. Since that time, many enthusiasts have become sceptics, empirical methods have become more limited, and it is no longer clear what research on animal mindreading is trying to find. In this article I suggest that the problems are theoretical and methodological: there is difficulty in conceptualising alternatives to 'full-blown' mindreading, and reluctance to use the kinds of empirical methods necessary to distinguish mindreading from other psychological mechanisms. I also suggest ways of tackling the theoretical and methodological problems that draw on recent studies of mindreading in humans, and the resources of experimental psychology more generally. In combination with the use of inanimate control stimuli, species that are unlikely to be capable of mindreading, and the 'goggles method', these approaches could restore both vigour and rigour to research on animal mindreading.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25102928     DOI: 10.3758/s13423-014-0704-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev        ISSN: 1069-9384


  29 in total

1.  Operational delineation of "what is learned" via the transposition experiment.

Authors:  D T CAMPBELL
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1954-05       Impact factor: 8.934

2.  Animal cognition: chimpanzee alarm calls depend on what others know.

Authors:  Robert M Seyfarth; Dorothy L Cheney
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  2012-01-24       Impact factor: 10.834

Review 3.  On the lack of evidence that non-human animals possess anything remotely resembling a 'theory of mind'.

Authors:  Derek C Penn; Daniel J Povinelli
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2007-04-29       Impact factor: 6.237

4.  Inferences about guessing and knowing by chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes).

Authors:  D J Povinelli; K E Nelson; S T Boysen
Journal:  J Comp Psychol       Date:  1990-09       Impact factor: 2.231

5.  Do 18-month-olds really attribute mental states to others? A critical test.

Authors:  Atsushi Senju; Victoria Southgate; Charlotte Snape; Mark Leonard; Gergely Csibra
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2011-06-03

6.  Seeing it their way: evidence for rapid and involuntary computation of what other people see.

Authors:  Dana Samson; Ian A Apperly; Jason J Braithwaite; Benjamin J Andrews; Sarah E Bodley Scott
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 3.332

7.  Knower-guesser differentiation in ravens: others' viewpoints matter.

Authors:  Thomas Bugnyar
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2010-09-08       Impact factor: 5.349

8.  Do chimpanzees know what conspecifics know?

Authors:  Brian Hare; Josep Call; Michael Tomasello
Journal:  Anim Behav       Date:  2001-01       Impact factor: 2.844

9.  Chimpanzees really know what others can see in a competitive situation.

Authors:  Juliane Bräuer; Josep Call; Michael Tomasello
Journal:  Anim Cogn       Date:  2007-04-11       Impact factor: 3.084

Review 10.  Social cognition by food-caching corvids. The western scrub-jay as a natural psychologist.

Authors:  Nicola S Clayton; Joanna M Dally; Nathan J Emery
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2007-04-29       Impact factor: 6.237

View more
  16 in total

1.  Studying audience effects in animals: what we can learn from human language research.

Authors:  Brittany Coppinger; Ryan A Cannistraci; Ferhat Karaman; Steven C Kyle; Elizabeth A Hobson; Todd M Freeberg; Jessica F Hay
Journal:  Anim Behav       Date:  2017-01-19       Impact factor: 2.844

Review 2.  Surviving threats: neural circuit and computational implications of a new taxonomy of defensive behaviour.

Authors:  Joseph LeDoux; Nathaniel D Daw
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurosci       Date:  2018-03-29       Impact factor: 34.870

3.  Little evidence that Eurasian jays protect their caches by responding to cues about a conspecific's desire and visual perspective.

Authors:  Piero Amodio; Benjamin G Farrar; Christopher Krupenye; Ljerka Ostojić; Nicola S Clayton
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2021-09-10       Impact factor: 8.140

4.  Advances in Animal Cognition.

Authors:  Jennifer Vonk
Journal:  Behav Sci (Basel)       Date:  2016-11-30

5.  Apes perform like infants in false-belief tasks.

Authors:  Thomas Bugnyar
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2017-12       Impact factor: 1.986

6.  Dogs demonstrate perspective taking based on geometrical gaze following in a Guesser-Knower task.

Authors:  Amélie Catala; Britta Mang; Lisa Wallis; Ludwig Huber
Journal:  Anim Cogn       Date:  2017-03-24       Impact factor: 3.084

7.  Submentalizing or mentalizing in a Level 1 perspective-taking task: A cloak and goggles test.

Authors:  Jane R Conway; Danna Lee; Mobin Ojaghi; Caroline Catmur; Geoffrey Bird
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2016-11-28       Impact factor: 3.332

Review 8.  Knowing Ourselves Together: The Cultural Origins of Metacognition.

Authors:  Cecilia Heyes; Dan Bang; Nicholas Shea; Christopher D Frith; Stephen M Fleming
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2020-03-24       Impact factor: 20.229

9.  Ravens attribute visual access to unseen competitors.

Authors:  Thomas Bugnyar; Stephan A Reber; Cameron Buckner
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2016-02-02       Impact factor: 14.919

10.  Vocalizing in chimpanzees is influenced by social-cognitive processes.

Authors:  Catherine Crockford; Roman M Wittig; Klaus Zuberbühler
Journal:  Sci Adv       Date:  2017-11-15       Impact factor: 14.136

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.