You are on page 1of 14

RunningHead:ABBREVIATEDTITLE 1

ASSIGNMENT COVER

Course code: PSY 5001

Course name: Cognitive Neuroscience

Assignment
Essay I
title:
Instructors
Krista Baka
name:
Students
Eleftheria Bikou
name:
Date: 16-05-2016

Comments:

Grade: /100
ABBREVIATED TITLE 2

Essay I

Eleftheria Bikou

16-05-2016

PSY 5001

Cognitive Neuroscience

address

email

course instructor

ABBREVIATED TITLE 3

ASSIGNMENT FEEDBACK PROFORMA


STUDENT NAME: Eleftheria Bikou PROGRAMME: Bsc in Psychology
STUDENT NUMBER: 20027765 YEAR: 2nd GROUP:

Module Number: PSY 5001 Term: 2nd Module Title: Cognitive Neuroscience

Tutor Responsible For Marking This Assignment: Krista Baka


Module Leader: Krista Baka
Assignment Due Date: 16-05-2016 Hand In Date: 16-05-2016
ASSIGNMENT TITLE: Following extensive reviews of experimental findings Euan MacPhail and colleagues have
concluded that there is no difference in the intellectual capacity of all non-human vertebrates and that species
occupying different social and environmental niches do not possess different mental abilities. Consider the
evidence that challenges this position.
FEEDBACK DATE(Return of assignments to students):
SECTION A: SELF ASSESSMENT (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE STUDENT)

I certify that this assignment is a result of my own work and that all sources have been acknowledged:

Signed:____Eleftheria Bikou___________________ Date______16-05-2016____________


SECTIONB:TUTORFEEDBACK
(based on assignment criteria, key skills and where appropriate, reference to professional standards)
STRENGTHS AREAS FOR IMPROVEMENT AND TARGETS
FOR FUTURE ASSIGNMENTS

MARK/GRADE AWARDED DATE SIGNED

ASSIGNMENT MODERATED BY:

MODERATORS COMMENTS:
ABBREVIATED TITLE 4

Abstract

Intelligence is most regularly examined in humans and when is tested in animals is often

compared with the abilities of humans. According to Euan MacPhail and colleagues there is no

difference in the intellectual capacity of all non-human vertebrates and species are occupying

different social and environmental niches do not possess different mental abilities. In this current

paper we are going to present evidence in order to contradict this opinion.


ABBREVIATED TITLE 5

Following extensive reviews of experimental findings Euan MacPhail and colleagues have

concluded that there is no difference in the intellectual capacity of all non-human

vertebrates and that species occupying different social and environmental niches do not

possess different mental abilities. Consider the evidence that challenges this position

Intelligence has been characterized in a wide range of ways including one's ability for

rationale, abstract thinking, understanding, self-awareness, correspondence, learning, emotional

knowledge, memory, arranging, imagination and critical thinking (Neisser et al., 1996). More

simply, intelligence can be defined as the capacity to observe information and restore it in order

to use it when a specific situation, which is correlated with this knowledge, occurs. Although,

human intelligence is what research is examined the most, animal intelligence is investigated too.

Animal intelligence, in many studies are often compared with human abilities. Generally,

our measures for non-human insight have incorporated an assortment of tools: physical

estimations cerebrum to body proportion, mind structure/convolution/neural thickness,

nearness of curios and physical devices, observational and tactile estimations, sensory signs,

many-sided quality of signs, cross-modal abilities, social intricacy, datamining-information

theory, signal/commotion, design acknowledgment, experimentation-memory, cognition, dialect

appreciation/use, theory of mind, direct inter faces-one way and two path interfaces with

primates, dolphins, winged animals and coincidental connections human/creature beneficial

interaction, cross-species enculturation (Herzing. 2014). People, are usually target on human-like

characteristics and this is the reason that scientists are not taking into consideration other types of

intelligence.

One of the essential principles of animal cognition is that large portions of the systems that

oversee human conduct likewise administer nonhuman conduct (Garry & Harper, 2009). Animal
ABBREVIATED TITLE 6

have exhibited the capacity to frame ideas, measure the progression of time and to learn by

perception (Heyes, Jaldow, Nokes, & Dawson, 1994). Like people, animals can accurately

recollect and segregate substantial amounts of visual data. Although human insight might be

driven by complex social structure, non-mammals additionally demonstrate capacities that

sometimes equal social well evolved creatures and incorporate instrument use and social

abilities, for example crows (Herzing, 2014). Also, a few species react utilizing more modern

mental procedures, for example, molding, memory, and thinking, to foresee and even control

ecological regularities (van Horik & Emery, 2011).

In many species there are complex syntax, semantics and referential sign use (Herzing,

2014). Investigations of alert brings in wild vervet monkeys, squirrels, and prairie dogs have

uncovered components of typical referential correspondence and capability. Likewise, research

facility investigations of intra and between species referential correspondence and fitness have

uncovered both semantic and syntactic comprehension in like manner and pygmy chimpanzees

(Savage-Rumbaugh, 1986) and bottlenose dolphins. Cognitive adjustments may at first create

under certain choice pressure, yet over the span of evolution get to be material to an extending

scope of stimuli (Heyes, 2003).

The nearest of the species to human, chimpanzees, offer around 98% of our hereditary

profile. However, major subjective changes have happened amid human advancement

(Lewontin, 1998). People and chimpanzees may be fundamentally the same as in their DNA,

however are inconceivably distinctive in the size and structure of their brains and their

subsequent subjective resources (Sherwood, Subiaul & Zawidzki, 2008). Also, the short-term

memory of chimpanzee is slightly different from humans (Premack, 2003).


ABBREVIATED TITLE 7

Tool use is an action that requires some advanced level of cognition and chimpanzee is one

of the many species that are using tools. But they have established a habitual and

multidimensional use of tools that refers to the models of early human primate innovation. (Sans,

Morgan & Gulick, 2004). An example of that is the way that chimpanzees use a one of a kind

device set made out of heavy sticks and thin angling tests to extricate Macrotermes from their

lair (Bermejo & Illera 1999). Current evidence suggests that among chimpanzees there are

differences too. In the central Africa, chimpanzees are using different techniques in order to feed

than chimpanzees in East and West Africa (Sans, Morgan & Gulick, 2004). This is a clear

example of the role of evolution and different ecosystems. Also, chimpanzees identify the

reversibility of actions.

In addition, New Caledonian crows are also have demonstrated a great tool behavior

utilizing and fabricating a few sorts of devices, and showing expansion in tool plans between

various topographical zones (Hunt and Gray 2003). Because of the variety of the tools that crows

are using, it is assumed that crows select or choose a tool that is suitable for a certain task

(Chappell & Kacelnik, 2004). Selectivity infers that the tool operator has some foreknowledge of

the undertaking ahead, and looks for or makes an instrument as per the normal needs. This is

agreed with a propelled level of intellectual capacity (Tomasello & Call 1997). Moreover, except

of tool use, crows have been found to take part in exercises, for example, sports, the capacity to

stow away and store sustenance over seasons, episodic-like memory, and the capacity to utilize

singular involvement in anticipating the conduct of ecological conspecifics (Prior, Schwarz &

Gntrkn, 2008).

In contrast with other animals (see below), crows when mirror self-acknowledgment

(MSR) has been tried to them (crows were presented to mirrors in various introductions) then
ABBREVIATED TITLE 8

they forcefully assaulted their appearance in the mirror as though a novel, same sex conspecific,

subsequently not showing any part of self-awareness (Kusayama, Bischof & Watanabe 2000).

Numerous birds and well evolved animal conceal sustenance stores for future utilization,

and to a great extent depend on memory to find these nourishment reserves. Scrub jay is one of

the few species that are arranging ahead for the future, a characteristic which was considering

exclusively in humans (Correia, Dickinson & Clayton, 2007). There are various expenses and

advantages of putting away sustenance within the sight of others (Clayton and Dickinson 1998).

The advantages incorporate expanded cautiousness and barrier against predators, and taking in

the area of good food sources, which are called information centers (Emery, Dally & Clayton,

2004). Additionally, the episodic memory of scrub jays is fixated on reserving, thus more than

likely, is its arranging. Also, they can recall what food they reserved, where and when it was

stored, even which different winged animals watched their storing (Premack, 2007).

Baboons have a very useful tool, from the social perspective, which is the way that respond

and use vocalizations. Moreover, baboon socio-subjective operations are liable to include what

might as well be called "chunking" to expand memory stockpiling limit, and the arrangement of

higher-request guidelines or examples, "speculations" that offer ascent to verifiable assumptions

about get-togethers (Anderson, 2008). From the other hand baboons are to a great degree self-

centered; for instance, they just show stress reactions when some part of "self" is at danger, for

example, their own particular predominance position or their physical prosperity.

Rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatt), according to Couchman et al. (2010) have exhibited an

assortment of complex intellectual capacities, including the capacity to make same-diverse

judgments, comprehend basic guidelines, and screen their own particular mental states.
ABBREVIATED TITLE 9

Furthermore, they have even been appeared to show self-agency, which is a critical sort of self-

awareness (Couchman, 2012).

By looking at contrasts in subjective capacities crosswise over species, deductions cannot

just be made about how animals perform certain assignments concerning environmental selection

pressures, additionally when such abilities advanced. Indirectly related species may indicate

comparative psychological capacities, for example, tool use or social perception, for instance,

corvids and apes (van Horik & Emery, 2011).

nimal skills are for the most part adjustments limited to a solitary objective. Human

abilities are area general and serve various objectives. For example, "arranging" might be

attached to long winded memory, recommending a wide fitness. Contrasts in the developmental

roots of creature and human capacities clarify why the one is attached to a solitary objective, and

the other to uncertainly numerous objectives.

The wide scope of subjective cases, which incorporates educating, causal thinking, short-

term memory, arranging and so forth., reliably demonstrates central confinements in the animal

adaptation of the human abilities (Premack, 2007). There is no irregularity in the divergence

the uniqueness amongst human and creature insight is good with the difference amongst human

and creature mind. The coming test is to comprehend the capacity of the cell level contrasts

amongst human and animal cerebrum. Furthermore, it is now known, that people and non-human

animal offer numerous basic intellectual capacities, yet the advancement of such capacities

contrasts in degrees crosswise over species. These distinctions are liable to be founded on

various computational requests in those species' socio-natural environments and particularly that

of the genealogical species (Penn, Holyoak & Povinelli, 2008).


ABBREVIATED TITLE 10

Considering all of the above elements and comparing these evidence to the findings of

Euan MacPhail and his colleagues which suggests that there is no difference in the intellectual

capacity of all non-human vertebrates and that species occupying different social and

environmental niches do not possess different mental abilities it is reasonable to say that we can

contradict these findings. Animals in general, as we refer previously, have many differences

between them. For example, Rhesus macaques are self-aware while scrub jays have the ability to

plan ahead the future. Nowadays, there are more evidence contradicting the opinion of Euan

MacPhail, because now there are more advanced instruments to use in experiments and

researches. Therefore, we have more clear findings.

Macphail, doubt the logic of barring perceptual competence from the enclosure of

comparative cognitive capacity. However, later admitted that everybody concurs that species

may vary in psychological limits identified with recognition, memory, motor skills and

inspiration, and everybody concurs that much littler contrasts are detectable if these are

overlooked, and attention is focused on the simplest sorts of reflexive affiliation (Walker, 1990).

Afterwards, he added that nobody is supportive of positioning all species on a solitary size of

"general intelligence".

The united development proposes there are a few parts of all-inclusiveness of the rise of

cognizance among social mammals, though with inquiries of usefulness and component talked

about (Herzing, 2014). There is a factor of cognitive complexity in animal behavior, which may

be impossible to use for rank-ordering any given pair of species, but should not therefore be

ignored. It is true that evolutionary selection must be for behavior, rather than any psychological

mechanism underlying it, but on the other hand we can be confident that the evolutionary process
ABBREVIATED TITLE 11

does not make allowances for contextual variables, and is appropriately sensitive to negative

results (Walker, 1990).

Further investigations have to not focus so much to the humanlike characteristics in future

studies, in order to explore more the world of non-human animals, their special abilities and the

associations/differences between animals and humans. Also, another consideration is to make the

environment in the studies more realistic in order to be like the natural environment of the

animals. In this way, the performances on the tasks are going to be more clear and maybe

something new may come up.


ABBREVIATED TITLE 12

References

Anderson, J. R. (2008). Book Review: Asking Baboons What They Think.Evolutionary

Psychology, 6(1), 147470490800600106.

Bermejo, M., & Illera, G. (1999). Tool-set for termite-fishing and honey extraction by wild

chimpanzees in the Lossi Forest, Congo. Primates, 40(4), 619-627.

Chappell, J., & Kacelnik, A. (2004). Selection of tool diameter by New Caledonian crows

Corvus moneduloides. Animal cognition, 7(2), 121-127.

Clayton, N. S., & Dickinson, A. (1998). Episodic-like memory during cache recovery by scrub

jays. Nature, 395(6699), 272-274.

Correia, S. P., Dickinson, A., & Clayton, N. S. (2007). Western scrub-jays anticipate future needs

independently of their current motivational state.Current Biology, 17(10), 856-861.

Couchman, J. J. (2012). Self-agency in rhesus monkeys. Biology letters,8(1), 39-41.

Couchman, J. J., Coutinho, M. V., Beran, M. J., & Smith, J. D. (2010). Beyond stimulus cues and

reinforcement signals: a new approach to animal metacognition. Journal of Comparative

Psychology, 124(4), 356.

Emery, N. J., Dally, J. M., & Clayton, N. S. (2004). Western scrub-jays (Aphelocoma californica)

use cognitive strategies to protect their caches from thieving conspecifics. Animal

cognition, 7(1), 37-43.

Garry, M., & Harper, D. N. (2009). Pigeons, Rats, and Humans Show Analogous

Misinformation. International Journal of Comparative Psychology,22(2).

Herzing, D. L. (2014). Profiling nonhuman intelligence: An exercise in developing unbiased

tools for describing other types of intelligence on earth. Acta Astronautica, 94(2), 676-

680.
ABBREVIATED TITLE 13

Heyes, C. M., Jaldow, E., Nokes, T., & Dawson, G. R. (1994). Imitation in rats (Rattus

norvegicus): the role of demonstrator action. Behavioural processes, 32(2), 173-182.

Heyes, C. (2003). Four routes of cognitive evolution. Psychological review,110(4), 713.

Hunt, G. R., & Gray, R. D. (2003). Diversification and cumulative evolution in New Caledonian

crow tool manufacture. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological

Sciences, 270(1517), 867-874.

Kusayama, T., Bischof, H. J., & Watanabe, S. (2000). Responses to mirror-image stimulation in

jungle crows (Corvus macrorhynchos). Animal Cognition, 3(1), 61-64.

Lewontin, R. C. (1998). The evolution of cognition: Questions we will never answer. An

invitation to cognitive science, 4, 107-132.

Neisser, U., Boodoo, G., Bouchard Jr, T. J., Boykin, A. W., Brody, N., Ceci, S. J., ... & Urbina, S.

(1996). Intelligence: knowns and unknowns. American psychologist, 51(2), 77.

Penn, D. C., Holyoak, K. J., & Povinelli, D. J. (2008). Darwin's mistake: Explaining the

discontinuity between human and nonhuman minds.Behavioral and Brain

Sciences, 31(02), 109-130.

Premack, D. (2007). Human and animal cognition: Continuity and discontinuity. Proceedings of

the National Academy of Sciences, 104(35), 13861-13867.

Prior, H., Schwarz, A., & Gntrkn, O. (2008). Mirror-induced behavior in the magpie (Pica

pica): evidence of self-recognition. PLoS Biol, 6(8), e202.

Sanz, C., Morgan, D., & Gulick, S. (2004). New insights into chimpanzees, tools, and termites

from the Congo Basin. The American Naturalist, 164(5), 567-581.


ABBREVIATED TITLE 14

Savage-Rumbaugh, S., McDonald, K., Sevcik, R. A., Hopkins, W. D., & Rubert, E. (1986).

Spontaneous symbol acquisition and communicative use by pygmy chimpanzees (Pan

paniscus). Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 115(3), 211.

Sherwood, C. C., Subiaul, F., & Zawidzki, T. W. (2008). A natural history of the human mind:

tracing evolutionary changes in brain and cognition. Journal of Anatomy, 212(4), 426-454.

Siebert, C. (2009). Watching whales watching us. New York Times Magazine, 8.

Tomasello, M., & Call, J. (1997). Primate cognition (Vol. 24, No. 3). Oxford University Press,

USA.

van Horik, J., & Emery, N. J. (2011). Evolution of cognition. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews:

Cognitive Science, 2(6), 621-633.

Walker, S. F. (1990). Specious comparisons versus comparative epistemology. Behavioral and

Brain Sciences, 13(02), 394-395.

You might also like