A new approach to comparing problem solving, flexibility and innovation

Comparative cognition aims at unfolding the cognitive processes underlying animal behavior and their evolution, and is concerned with testing hypotheses about the evolution of the brain and intelligence in general. It is a developing field still challenged by conceptual and methodological issues. Systematic cross-species comparisons of cognitive abilities, taking both phylogeny and ecology into account are still scarce. One major reason for this is that it is very hard to find universally applicable paradigms that can be used to investigate the same cognitive ability or ‘general intelligence’ in several species. Many comparative paradigms have not paid sufficient attention to interspecific differences in anatomical, behavioral and perceptual features, besides psychological variables such as motivation, attentiveness or neophobia, thus potentially producing misrepresentative results. A new stance for future comparative research may be to establish behavioral and psychological profiles prior or alongside to comparing specific cognitive skills across species. Potentially revealing profiles could be obtained from examining species differences in how novel experimental (extractive foraging) tasks are explored and approached, how solutions are discovered and which ones are preferred, how flexibly multiple solutions are used and how much individual variation occurs, before proceeding to more detailed tests. Such new comparative approach is the Multi-Access-Box. It presents the animal with a novel problem that can be solved in several ways thus offering the possibility to examine species differences in all the above, and extract behavioral and perceptual determinants of their performance. Simultaneously, it is a suitable paradigm to collect comparative data about flexibility, innovativeness and problem solving ability, i.e., theoretical covariates of ‘general intelligence’, in a standardized manner.

[1]  Anurag Tripathi,et al.  2011 Landes Bioscience. Do not distribute. , 2011 .

[2]  A. Kacelnik,et al.  Flexibility in Problem Solving and Tool Use of Kea and New Caledonian Crows in a Multi Access Box Paradigm , 2011, PloS one.

[3]  A. Dickinson,et al.  Planning for the future by western scrub-jays , 2007, Nature.

[4]  Russell P. Balda,et al.  Predicting Cognitive Capacity from Natural History: Examples from Four Species of Corvids , 1996 .

[5]  R. Gossette,et al.  EXAMINATION OF THE REVERSAL INDEX (RI) ACROSS FIFTEEN DIFFERENT MAMMALIAN AND AVIAN SPECIES , 1967 .

[6]  L. Lefebvre,et al.  Feeding innovations and forebrain size in birds , 1997, Animal Behaviour.

[7]  Brian Hare,et al.  Can competitive paradigms increase the validity of experiments on primate social cognition? , 2001, Animal Cognition.

[8]  E. Visalberghi,et al.  Lack of comprehension of cause-effect relations in tool-using capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella). , 1994, Journal of comparative psychology.

[9]  R. Gossette,et al.  Comparisons of successive discrimination reversal performances among closely and remotely related avian species. , 1966, Animal behaviour.

[10]  J. Krebs,et al.  Memory for spatial and object-specific cues in food-storing and non-storing birds , 1994, Journal of Comparative Physiology A.

[11]  Russell P. Balda,et al.  Predicting Cognitive Capacity from Natural History , 1996 .

[12]  Joanna M. Dally,et al.  Social cognition by food-caching corvids. The western scrub-jay as a natural psychologist , 2007, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[13]  W Hodos,et al.  The Scala naturae revisited: evolutionary scales and anagenesis in comparative psychology. , 1991, Journal of comparative psychology.

[14]  K. Laland,et al.  Social intelligence, innovation, and enhanced brain size in primates , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[15]  L. Huber,et al.  Technical intelligence in animals: the kea model , 2006, Animal Cognition.

[16]  David Premack On the origins of domain-specific primitives. , 1992 .

[17]  P. Bednekoff,et al.  Long-term spatial memory in four seed-caching corvid species , 1997, Animal Behaviour.

[18]  Stan A. Kuczaj,et al.  How Do Dolphins Solve Problems , 2009 .

[19]  K. Strier Behavioral Flexibility in Primates. Causes and Consequences , 2006, International journal of primatology.

[20]  M. Tomasello,et al.  The Structure of Individual Differences in the Cognitive Abilities of Children and Chimpanzees , 2010, Psychological science.

[21]  Valen E. Johnson,et al.  General Intelligence in Another Primate: Individual Differences across Cognitive Task Performance in a New World Monkey (Saguinus oedipus) , 2009, PloS one.

[22]  H. Kummer,et al.  Conditions of Innovative Behaviour in Primates , 1985 .

[23]  Robert O Deaner,et al.  Overall Brain Size, and Not Encephalization Quotient, Best Predicts Cognitive Ability across Non-Human Primates , 2007, Brain, Behavior and Evolution.

[24]  A. Kacelnik,et al.  Cognitive Processes Associated with Sequential Tool Use in New Caledonian Crows , 2009, PloS one.

[25]  A. Kamil,et al.  A synthetic approach to the study of animal intelligence. , 1987, Nebraska Symposium on Motivation. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation.

[26]  Judith M Burkart,et al.  Trade-offs between social learning and individual innovativeness in common marmosets, Callithrix jacchus , 2009, Animal Behaviour.

[27]  Nathan J Emery,et al.  Insightful problem solving and creative tool modification by captive nontool-using rooks , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[28]  L. Huber,et al.  Big brains are not enough: performance of three parrot species in the trap-tube paradigm , 2010, Animal Cognition.

[29]  Louis Lefebvre,et al.  Technical innovations drive the relationship between innovativeness and residual brain size in birds , 2009, Animal Behaviour.

[30]  A. Bond,et al.  Kea, Bird of Paradox: The Evolution and Behavior of a New Zealand Parrot , 1999 .

[31]  N. Emery,et al.  Effects of experience and social context on prospective caching strategies by scrub jays , 2001, Nature.

[32]  T. Bugnyar,et al.  What You See Is What You Get? Exclusion Performances in Ravens and Keas , 2009, PLoS ONE.

[33]  Species Differences in Spatial Memory Performance on a Three-dimensional Task , 2010 .

[34]  S. Shettleworth The evolution of comparative cognition: Is the snark still a boojum? , 2009, Behavioural Processes.

[35]  M. Tomasello,et al.  Chimpanzees know what conspecifics do and do not see , 2000, Animal Behaviour.

[36]  M. Tomasello,et al.  Humans Have Evolved Specialized Skills of Social Cognition: The Cultural Intelligence Hypothesis , 2007, Science.

[37]  M. Bastian,et al.  Signs of culture , 2007, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[38]  A. Kamil,et al.  Positive transfer from successive reversal training to learning set in Blue Jays (Cyanocitta cristata) , 1977 .

[39]  Simon M. Reader,et al.  Environmental variability and primate behavioural flexibility , 2003 .

[40]  A. Kamil,et al.  A comparative study of cache recovery by three corvid species , 1989, Animal Behaviour.

[41]  Christian Rutz,et al.  The Ecological Significance of Tool Use in New Caledonian Crows , 2010, Science.

[42]  G. Roth,et al.  Evolution of the brain and intelligence , 2005, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[43]  A C Kamil,et al.  Performance of four seed-caching corvid species in operant tests of nonspatial and spatial memory. , 1995, Journal of comparative psychology.

[44]  L. Huber,et al.  Social learning affects object exploration and manipulation in keas, Nestor notabilis , 2001, Animal Behaviour.

[45]  S. Shettleworth Cognition, evolution, and behavior , 1998 .

[46]  A. Whiten,et al.  Evolutionary perspectives on imitation: is a comparative psychology of social learning possible? , 2002, Animal Cognition.

[47]  I. Teschke,et al.  The tale of the finch: adaptive radiation and behavioural flexibility , 2010, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[48]  D. Povinelli Folk physics for apes : the chimpanzee's theory of how the world works , 2003 .

[49]  B Anderson,et al.  The g factor in non-human animals. , 2000, Novartis Foundation symposium.

[50]  V. Johnson,et al.  Do Some Taxa Have Better Domain-General Cognition than others? A Meta-Analysis of Nonhuman Primate Studies , 2006 .

[51]  Daniel Sol,et al.  Behavioural flexibility and invasion success in birds , 2002, Animal Behaviour.

[52]  Elizabeth M. Brannon,et al.  How does cognition evolve? Phylogenetic comparative psychology , 2012, Animal Cognition.

[53]  Bernd Heinrich,et al.  AN EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION OF INSIGHT IN COMMON RAVENS (CORVUS CORAX) , 1995 .

[54]  J. Bolhuis,et al.  The evolution of intelligence: adaptive specializations versus general process , 2001, Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society.

[55]  A. Jensen,et al.  The g factor , 1996, Nature.

[56]  T. Bugnyar,et al.  Social attention in keas, dogs, and human children , 2008, Animal Cognition.