Literature DB >> 26853364

Sensitivity to Relational Similarity and Object Similarity in Apes and Children.

Stella Christie1, Dedre Gentner2, Josep Call3, Daniel Benjamin Moritz Haun4.   

Abstract

Relational reasoning is a hallmark of sophisticated cognition in humans. Does it exist in other primates? Despite some affirmative answers, there appears to be a wide gap in relational ability between humans and other primates--even other apes. Here, we test one possible explanation for this gap, motivated by developmental research showing that young humans often fail at relational reasoning tasks because they focus on objects instead of relations. When asked, "duck:duckling is like tiger:?," preschool children choose another duckling (object match) rather than a cub. If other apes share this focus on concrete objects, it could undermine their relational reasoning in similar ways. To test this, we compared great apes and 3-year-old humans' relational reasoning on the same spatial mapping task, with and without competing object matches. Without competing object matches, both children and Pan species (chimpanzees and bonobos) spontaneously used relational similarity, albeit children more so. But when object matches were present, only children responded strongly to them. We conclude that the relational gap is not due to great apes' preference for concrete objects. In fact, young humans show greater object focus than nonhuman apes.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26853364     DOI: 10.1016/j.cub.2015.12.054

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Curr Biol        ISSN: 0960-9822            Impact factor:   10.834


  5 in total

1.  From the structure of experience to concepts of structure: How the concept "cause" is attributed to objects and events.

Authors:  Anna Leshinskaya; Sharon L Thompson-Schill
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  2019-04

2.  A Functional-Cognitive Framework for Cooperation Between Functional and Cognitive Researchers in the Context of Stimulus Relations Research.

Authors:  Jan De Houwer
Journal:  Perspect Behav Sci       Date:  2017-03-01

Review 3.  Comparing cognition by integrating concept learning, proactive interference, and list memory.

Authors:  Anthony A Wright; Debbie M Kelly; Jeffrey S Katz
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2018-06       Impact factor: 1.986

4.  High-Speed Videography Reveals How Honeybees Can Turn a Spatial Concept Learning Task Into a Simple Discrimination Task by Stereotyped Flight Movements and Sequential Inspection of Pattern Elements.

Authors:  Marie Guiraud; Mark Roper; Lars Chittka
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2018-08-03

5.  Spontaneous relational and object similarity in wild bumblebees.

Authors:  Gema Martin-Ordas
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2022-08-31       Impact factor: 3.812

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.