Cited by 56Primate Behavior and EcologyChild and Animal Learning DevelopmentCognitive Abilities and Testing

Assessing the validity of ape-human comparisons: A reply to Boesch (2007).

Tomasello, Michael, Call, Josep·2008·Journal of Comparative Psychology

Abstract

Boesch (2007) criticizes research comparing ape and human cognition on the basis of both internal and external validity. The authors show here that most of those criticisms are not valid because: (i) most threats to internal validity (e.g., conspecific experimenters for humans but not apes) are controlled for experimentally; (ii) externally, there is no empirical evidence that captive apes have fewer cognitive skills than wild apes and indeed some evidence (especially from human-raised apes) that they have more; and (iii) externally, there is no empirical evidence that Western middle-class children have different cognitive skills from other children at very early ages in basic cognitive domains. Although difficult, with appropriate methodological care, experimental cross-species comparisons may be validly made.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0735-7036.122.4.449

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Actual comparisons of problem-solving behavior are essential for testing hypotheses regarding cognitive evolution.

    “Thus, actual comparisons of problem-solving behavior are essential for testing hypotheses regarding cognitive evolution (Tomasello and Call 2008).”

    From How does cognition evolve? Phylogenetic comparative psychology (2012) · cites this paper as Tomasello and Call 2008

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tomasello, M., & Call, J.
Affiliations
Max Planck Society (DE)
Venue
Journal of Comparative Psychology
Published
2008
Volume
122
Issue
4
Pages
449-452
ISSN
  • 0093-4127 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-2087
  • 0735-7036
OpenAlex
W1979862862
Cited by
56
References
30
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 5
FWCI
4.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of comparative psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Max Planck Institute for Plasma Physics (submittedVersion)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Primate Behavior and Ecology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Child and Animal Learning Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
Keywords
internal validity, generalizability, captive apes, wild apes, child cognitive development, experimental design
MeSH terms
Animals, Appetitive Behavior, Aptitude, Child, Pan troglodytes, Humans, Motivation, Problem Solving, Social Environment, Species Specificity, Selection Bias, Personal Construct Theory

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review