The Species Corvus Corax

They are ready to call upon the “Clever Hans phenomenon” whenever an animal seems to be exhibiting intelligent behavior. Clever Hans taught psychology some important lessons, but the incident may also have madebehavioral scientists[5] too cautious about the mental abilities of animals. Animals that are easy to train may also be very intelligent. Some of the most trainable creatures, such as dolphins, are also the most likely candidates for genuine animal thinking. But finding ways to get at animals’ real mental capacity can be very difficult. Many pitfalls await the scientist trying to interpret animals’ behavior and make inferences about their intelligence. One is inconsistency An animal might breeze through what we consider a difficult learning task and then fail when presented with what seems obvious to us. When an animal can’t perform well, we don’t know if it really cannot solve the problems put to it or if it just doesn’t want to. Sometimes the difficulty lies in the perceptive abilities of the animals. The animal may have the mental ability and the desire to solve the problem but is unable to make the discriminations[6] being asked of it. For example, a researcher using colored objects to compare learning in a cebus monkey and in a rhesus monkey first found that the rhesus scored much better than the

First of all, the author of the passage claims that humpback whales have the intelligence to use stars for orientation. However, the professor maintains that the ability to use stars for navigation has nothing to do with cognitive ability. In fact, as is mentioned by the professor, dogs, whose brain capacity is only of medium level, have the ability of using stars for navigation. Therefore, there is no correlation

1. Nicky Clayton, an experimental psychologist at UC Davis, observed a group of jays during a lunch break. She noticed that they frequently changed their hiding places for the food that they stole from the students. The frequency at which they did this, and how they tried to avoid being watched by other birds suggests that they moved the food to keep other birds from finding it. If they did not think about what the other jays thought, they would not go to such lengths to keep the other jays from reaching their food. Furthermore, they remembered specifically which birds had watched them cache. The birds went to great measures to ensure that other birds had no knowledge of where they put their food (waiting until the other birds were distracted,

They concede that there may be some spectrum of intelligence, but counter that we cannot count the perception-action coupling so as to approximate the range of intelligence we, or any other organism, might have. I breathed a slight sigh of relief after reading this section. If, at some point, I decide to buy the plant intelligence argument, which at the moment, despite thinking that it makes sense, I cannot do, then I may take solace in the idea that there is still some unquantifiable difference in intelligence between my houseplants and I.

Frist of all, the author in the article considers that humpback whales are well-developed in cognitive ability, so it can provide a sound basis for the ability to use a complex abstract system of sensory to navigating by stars for long distances migration. But the professor claims that the high intelligence is no real connection with abstract sensory. Because ducks can also navigate external object by distinct.

First of all, the author states that humpback whales's intelligence provides them ability to be cognitive by stars. However, the lecturer mentions that ducks are animals without high-intelligence which also navigated by stars.

Russel T Hurlburt (2011) expressed that, “unsymbolized thinking is the experience of differentiated thought that does not include the experience of words” (Hurlburt, para. 3). To compare, this supports Terrace’s theory that thinking can occur without language; as Hulburt explains that our thoughts guide us to find answers and to use other ways to learn the answer (Hurlburt, 2011). This means that if given a problem, we use our minds to find a way to think through an action to solve it. Lana and Sarah, in Rumbaugh’s and Premack’s studies, were able to learn which objects or lexigrams to use, and in which order, to receive the type of reward they wanted (Terrace, 2011, p. 100). It took thought processing for the chimpanzees to begin to understand what patterns of symbols got them what

The purpose of the article, Mental math helps monk parakeets find their place in pecking order, was to see how monk parakeets create social rankings within their flocks based on individual, aggressive tendencies. In an experiment preformed with two independent flocks, the birds’ aggressive actions were observed over a period of twenty four days. The scientists conducting the observation watched as both flocks engaged in fights between their members. They were able to observe the different fights that individual birds had with one another and determined the winners from each. From there, they noted which birds won and which lost, watching over 1013 wins in the first group and 1360 in the second group. From this data, the scientists were able

We have seen many examples of animal intelligence, and I think Animals are smart in their own ways. We have been focused on chimps, birds, and killer whales, and it is impressive how intelligent they are. In one of the listening we have seen how a chimp understood that another chimp was disabled and helped that chimp. We also learn that competition for food is what motivates them. For example: A chimp with a human who has food, and the chimp want to get the food. The chimp figured it out that if he sneaks around a barrier that the human can’t see, it could get the food. So this demonstrates that chimps understand how to manipulate the situation to get what it wants. Birds also demonstrate that food is their principal motivation. We learn from

The argument from design supports the idea that animals have minds or internal consciousness by suggesting that animals have the same complex systems that make up the human mind. It suggests that we must conclude a similar ability to think and rationalize because if the systems are so complex/similar animals must have a “mind” because we have a “mind”.

Spatial Cognition is concerned with the achievement, organization, application, and modification of knowledge about spatial surroundings (Bandura., 1963). These capabilities enable animals and humans to manage basic and high-level cognitive tasks in everyday life (Bandura.,1971). Spatial cognition studies have assisted to tie cognitive psychology and neuroscience together. Most researchers are concerned about how animals acquire and find information. Since acquiring and acting on spatial information appears to have computational requirements from learning to predict temporal sequences of events, we might expect to find adaptively specialized, domain-specific mechanisms of spatial learning and/or

Great Grey Owls (Strix nebulosa), use a wide variety of different environmental factors when hunting a lemming (Lemmus sp.) when it is hidden beneath the snow. The different sensory systems which the owl possesses are particularly adjusted in order for the owl to most suitably use them to the best of its ability when hunting. The various sensory systems refer to the way in which the nervous system receives information from the external environment (exterocepton), internal environment (interoception, and the position and movement of the bod of the animal (proprioception). Once the body is given this sensory information, it is used to generate what the animal’s next move will be. Animals need these sensory systems in order to have an understanding of what is going on within their body and what is happening in the surrounding environment, Stevens (2013).

Humans have for centuries pondered on the mind, its existence, its beginning, it’s limit, it’s substance, and fought many different arguments against them all. But how do we know if any animals have a mind? Is intelligence unique to humans? Professor Donald Griffin has pointed out that “consciousness is not a tidy all-or-nothing entity, it varies with age, culture, experience and gender. And if animals have conscious experiences, these presumably vary widely as well.” If humans have minds, it must be possible that animals also have minds. And though no one would believe that earthworms and earwigs have thought processes like our own, it has been proven that chimps share 98% of genome with humans. Chimps have also shown that they can lie

We know that dolphins have some of the highest intelligence levels in the animal kingdom (Conner 2007). Studies show that dolphins have a memory capacity of up to 20 years (Bruck 2013). New studies show that dolphins understand numerical quantities and the difference between “less” and “more” (Adelson 2005). There are multiple studies that discuss dolphin intelligence in comparison to chimps and elephants. Dolphins and chimps are both excellent users of tools and have an innate ability to solve problems. Memories of dolphins rival that of an elephant. Dolphins have advanced social hierarchies which mimic those of chimpanzees and humans. Dolphins also have shown the ability to create and understand a language, which is something that was thought to be unique to humans (Bearzi 2010). Humans and chimps are closely related. We also know that dolphins and chimps have similar cognitive abilities. Thus, we can hypothesize that dolphin intelligence is similar to human

Social Cognitive came from the root of Edwin B. Holt and Harold Chapman Brown 's 1931 book “Animal Drive and The Learning Process”(Lent, Steven, Gail, 1994). Although, “American psychologists Albert Bandura (1986, 1998, 2000) and Walter Mischel