Understanding the limits to animal cognition
Current Biology, ISSN: 0960-9822, Vol: 34, Issue: 7, Page: R294-R300
2024
- 2Citations
- 28Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Article Description
The thriving field of comparative cognition examines the behaviour of diverse animals in cognitive terms. Comparative cognition research has primarily focused on the abilities of animals — what tasks they can do — rather than on the limits of their cognition — tasks that exceed an animal’s cognitive abilities. We propose that understanding and identifying cognitive limits is as important as demonstrating the capacities of animal minds. Here, we identify challenges that have deterred the study of cognitive limits related to epistemic, practical and publication problems. The epistemic problem is concerned with how we can confidently infer a cognitive limit from null or negative results. The practical problem is how can we be certain our research has identified a cognitive limit rather than failures in tasks due to methodological or experimental design issues. The publication problem outlines the publication bias toward positive and exciting results over negative or null results in animal cognition. We propose solutions to these three challenges and examples of how to conduct research to confidently identify and confirm cognitive limits in animals. We believe a refocus on the cognitive limits of animals is the next step in the field of comparative cognition. Knowing the limits to the intelligence of different animals will aid us in appreciating the diversity of animal intelligence, and will resolve outstanding questions of how cognition evolves.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960982224002185; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2024.02.043; http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85189812666&origin=inward; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38593777; https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0960982224002185; https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2024.02.043
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know