Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-cphqk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-07T00:13:34.311Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Animal metacognition? It's all in the methods

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 January 2004

Sara J. Shettleworth
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, M5S 3G3, Canada shettle@psych.utoronto.ca sutton@psych.utoronto.ca http://psych.utoronto.ca/~shettle/ http://psych.utoronto.ca/~sutton/
Jennifer E. Sutton
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, M5S 3G3, Canada shettle@psych.utoronto.ca sutton@psych.utoronto.ca http://psych.utoronto.ca/~shettle/ http://psych.utoronto.ca/~sutton/
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

When animals choose between completing a cognitive task and “escaping,” proper interpretation of their behavior depends crucially on methodological details, including how forced and freely chosen tests are mixed and whether appropriate transfer tests are administered. But no matter how rigorous the test, it is impossible to go beyond functional similarity between human and nonhuman behaviors to certainty about human-like consciousness.

Type
Brief Report
Copyright
© 2003 Cambridge University Press