The misbehaviour of a metacognitive monkey.
The misbehaviour of a metacognitive monkey.
复制标题
元认知猴子的不当行为。
DOI：
10.1163/1568539x-00003251
复制
发表时间：
2015
期刊：
影响因子：
1.3
通讯作者：
Beran,MichaelJ
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Sayers,Ken;Evans,TheodoreA;Menzel,Emilie;Smith,JDavid;Beran,MichaelJ
元认知，即对自己精神状态的监控，是人类智力的一个基本方面。尽管在非人类动物中进行的试验暗示了不确定性监测，但一些作者仅根据原始心理机制和强化机制来解释这些结果，其中“强化”总是被认为是获得食物奖励的交付和消费。令人惊讶的是，很少有研究详细描述了参与这些任务的动物的试验行为。在这里，我们报告了基于行为学的观察恒河猴完成稀疏-密集的歧视问题，并给予逃避审判的选择（即，“不确定性”（uncertainty）是自己的选择。不确定性的反应通常是在高客观难度的试验中进行的，其特点是在开始可见的试验之前有很长的延迟时间，反应需要很长的时间，即使在控制了难度之后，反应过程中也会有很高的摇摆不定。在高客观难度的试验中，不正确的反应也很常见，但其特点是摇摆程度较低。这说明了“犹豫”可能具有的适应性，并且与模型不一致，该模型认为或预测每当出现具有挑战性的问题时，隐式的、不灵活的信息寻求或“替代选项”行为。混杂模型表明，元认知任务中的非人类行为仅由食物递送/消耗驱动，还观察到猴子允许颗粒在所有响应/结果类别的试验期间和之后积累和消耗它们（即，无论是正确的、不正确的还是转义的）。因此，这项研究支持了先前的研究结果，即恒河猴在元认知任务中的行为在某些方面与单纯的食物交付/消费无关，甚至与避免惩罚无关。这些和其他观察结果与恒河猴的进化状态和自然倾向非常吻合，但削弱了在此类测试中的反应仅与联想机制相关的论点，而是表明更多的衍生和控制认知过程。考虑到灵长类动物的神经适应性，以及它们高度灵活的社会和生态行为，后一种解释似乎特别吝啬。
Metacognition, the monitoring of one’s own mental states, is a fundamental aspect of human intellect. Despite tests in nonhuman animals suggestive of uncertainty monitoring, some authors interpret these results solely in terms of primitive psychological mechanisms and reinforcement regimes, where ‘reinforcement’ is invariably considered to be the delivery and consumption of earned food rewards. Surprisingly, few studies have detailed the trial-by-trial behaviour of animals engaged in such tasks. Here we report ethology-based observations on a rhesus monkey completing sparse-dense discrimination problems, and given the option of escaping trials (i.e., responding ‘uncertain’) at its own choosing. Uncertainty responses were generally made on trials of high objective difficulty, and were characterized by long latencies before beginning visible trials, long times taken for response, and, even after controlling for difficulty, high degrees of wavering during response. Incorrect responses were also common in trials of high objective difficulty, but were characterized by low degrees of wavering. This speaks to the likely adaptive nature of ‘hesitation’, and is inconsistent with models which argue or predict implicit, inflexible information-seeking or ‘alternative option’ behaviours whenever challenging problems present themselves. Confounding models which suggest that nonhuman behaviour in metacognition tasks is driven solely by food delivery/consumption, the monkey was also observed allowing pellets to accumulate and consuming them during and after trials of all response/outcome categories (i.e., whether correct, incorrect, or escaped). This study thus bolsters previous findings that rhesus monkey behaviour in metacognition tasks is in some respects disassociated from mere food delivery/consumption, or even the avoidance of punishment. These and other observations fit well with the evolutionary status and natural proclivities of rhesus monkeys, but weaken arguments that responses in such tests are solely associated with associative mechanisms, and instead suggest more derived and controlled cognitive processing. The latter interpretation appears particularly parsimonious given the neurological adaptations of primates, as well as their highly flexible social and ecological behaviour.