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

2Citations
Citations of this article
60Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

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 judgment and interpretation within comparative psychology.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Smith, J. D., Couchman, J. J., & Beran, M. J. (2013). The highs and lows of theoretical interpretation in animal-metacognition research. In The Cognitive Neuroscience of Metacognition (pp. 87–111). Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-45190-4_5

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free