"Play it Again": a new method for testing metacognition in animals.
"Play it Again": a new method for testing metacognition in animals.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/s10071-011-0445-y
复制
发表时间：
2012-03
期刊：
影响因子：
2.7
通讯作者：
Crystal, Jonathon D.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Foote, Allison L.;Crystal, Jonathon D.
动物中假定的元认知数据可以用非元认知模型来解释（例如，刺激泛化）。本研究的主要目的是开发一种新的方法来测试动物的元认知，可能会产生的数据，可以解释的元认知，但不是由非元认知模型。接下来，我们用老鼠做实验。首先，给大鼠呈现一段短暂的噪音持续时间，随后将其分为短或长。大鼠有时被迫立即进行持续时间测试，被迫重复相同的持续时间，或者可以选择进行测试或重复持续时间。元认知，但不是一个替代的非元认知模型，预测的准确性较高的困难持续时间时，受试者被迫重复的刺激相比，试验中，受试者选择重复的刺激，在我们的数据中观察到的模式。非元认知模型的模拟表明，这部分来自大鼠的数据与元认知一致，但其他方面的数据与元认知不一致。目前的研究结果质疑了先前的研究结果，即大鼠具有元认知能力。虽然混合模式的数据不支持大鼠的元认知，我们认为，该方法的引入可能是有价值的测试与其他物种，以帮助评估元认知的比较情况。
Putative metacognition data in animals may be explained by non-metacognition models (e.g., stimulus generalization). The primary objective of the present study was to develop a new method for testing metacognition in animals that may yield data that can be explained by meta-cognition but not by non-metacognition models. Next, we used the new method with rats. Rats were first presented with a brief noise duration which they would subsequently classify as short or long. Rats were sometimes forced to take an immediate duration test, forced to repeat the same duration, or had the choice to take the test or repeat the duration. Metacognition, but not an alternative non-meta-cognition model, predicts that accuracy on difficult durations is higher when subjects are forced to repeat the stimulus compared to trials in which the subject chose to repeat the stimulus, a pattern observed in our data. Simulation of a non-metacognition model suggests that this part of the data from rats is consistent with metacognition, but other aspects of the data are not consistent with metacognition. The current results call into question previous findings suggesting that rats have metacognitive abilities. Although a mixed pattern of data does not support metacognition in rats, we believe the introduction of the method may be valuable for testing with other species to help evaluate the comparative case for metacognition.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
2.7
作者：
Richards, JB;Mitchell, SH;Seiden, LS
通讯作者：
Seiden, LS
DOI：
10.1037/0097-7403.25.3.389
发表时间：
1999-07-01
期刊：
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-ANIMAL BEHAVIOR PROCESSES
影响因子：
--
作者：
Inman, A;Shettleworth, SJ
通讯作者：
Shettleworth, SJ
影响因子：
8.2
作者：
Kornell, Nate;Son, Lisa K.;Terrace, Herbert S.
通讯作者：
Terrace, Herbert S.
影响因子：
9.2
作者：
Foote, Allison L.;Crystal, Jonathon D.
通讯作者：
Crystal, Jonathon D.
影响因子：
--
作者：
Hampton, Robert R.
通讯作者：
Hampton, Robert R.