Cited by 49Primate Behavior and EcologyChild and Animal Learning DevelopmentAnimal Behavior and Welfare Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Animal Thinking: Contemporary Issues in Comparative Cognition

Abstract

Experts from psychology, neuroscience, philosophy, ecology, and evolutionary biology assess the field of animal cognition. Do animals have cognitive maps? Do they possess knowledge? Do they plan for the future? Do they understand that others have mental lives of their own? This volume provides a state-of-the-art assessment of animal cognition, with experts from psychology, neuroscience, philosophy, ecology, and evolutionary biology addressing these questions in an integrative fashion. It summarizes the latest research, identifies areas where consensus has been reached, and takes on current controversies. Over the last thirty years, the field has shifted from the collection of anecdotes and the pursuit of the subjective experience of animals to a rigorous, hypothesis-driven experimental approach. Taking a skeptical stance, this volume stresses the notion that in many cases relatively simple rules may account for rather complex and flexible behaviors. The book critically evaluates current concepts and puts a strong focus on the psychological mechanisms that underpin animal behavior. It offers comparative analyses that reveal common principles as well as adaptations that evolved in particular species in response to specific selective pressures. It assesses experimental approaches to the study of animal navigation, decision making, social cognition, and communication and suggests directions for future research. The book promotes a research program that seeks to understand animals' cognitive abilities and behavioral routines as individuals and as members of social groups.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.7551/mitpress/9780262016636.001.0001

Cites

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

  • As a whole, these results indicate that teleost fish, like mammals, birds, and reptilians, can use allocentric strategies to solve spatial tasks.

    “As a whole, these results indicate that teleost fish, like mammals [39,48,65,68,96], birds [97,98,99,100], and reptilians [101,102], can use allocentric strategies to solve spatial tasks.”

    From Spatial Cognition in Teleost Fish: Strategies and Mechanisms (2021) · cites this paper as [96]

Citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Searcy, W., Christiansen, M., Corballis, M., Fischer, J., Grüter, C., Margoliash, D., Owren, M., Price, T., Seyfarth, R. M., & Wild, M.
Venue
The MIT Press eBooks
Publisher
The MIT Press
Published
2011-11-04
OpenAlex
W404466819
Cited by
49
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 3
FWCI
7.32
Type
book
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The MIT Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
  • Kent Academic Repository (University of Kent) (submittedVersion)
  • GRO (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Primate Behavior and Ecology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Child and Animal Learning Development
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Animal Science and Zoology › Animal Behavior and Welfare Studies
Keywords
animal cognition, cognitive maps, animal knowledge, future planning, theory of mind, animal navigation, decision-making, social cognition, animal communication, behavioral routines, evolutionary psychology, comparative cognition, animal behavior

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