首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences >The highs and lows of theoretical interpretation in animal-metacognition research
【2h】

The highs and lows of theoretical interpretation in animal-metacognition research

机译:动物元认知研究中理论解释的高潮和低潮

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Humans feel uncertain. They know when they do not know. These feelings and the responses to them ground the research literature on metacognition. It is a natural question whether animals share this cognitive capacity, and thus animal metacognition has become an influential research area within comparative psychology. Researchers have explored this question by testing many species using perception and memory paradigms. There is an emerging consensus that animals share functional parallels with humans’ conscious metacognition. Of course, this research area poses difficult issues of scientific inference. How firmly should we hold the line in insisting that animals’ performances are low-level and associative? How high should we set the bar for concluding that animals share metacognitive capacities with humans? This area offers a constructive case study for considering theoretical problems that often confront comparative psychologists. The authors present this case study and address diverse issues of scientific judgement and interpretation within comparative psychology.
机译:人类感到不确定。他们知道什么时候不知道。这些感觉和对它们的反应使研究文献成为元认知的基础。动物是否具有这种认知能力是一个自然的问题,因此动物元认知已成为比较心理学中一个有影响力的研究领域。研究人员通过使用感知和记忆范例测试了许多物种,从而探索了这个问题。人们逐渐达成共识,即动物与人类的意识元认知具有相似的功能。当然,这个研究领域提出了科学推断的难题。我们应该多么坚决地坚持认为动物的表演是低级的和有联想力的?我们应该设定多高的标准来断定动物与人类共享元认知能力?该领域提供了一个建设性的案例研究,用于考虑比较心理学家经常面临的理论问题。作者介绍了这个案例研究,并探讨了比较心理学中科学判断和解释的各种问题。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号