Animal Cognition

, Volume 15, Issue 2, pp 187–199 | Cite as

“Play it Again”: a new method for testing metacognition in animals

Original Paper

Abstract

Putative metacognition data in animals may be explained by non-metacognition models (e.g., stimulus generalization). The primary objective of the present study was to develop a new method for testing metacognition in animals that may yield data that can be explained by metacognition but not by non-metacognition models. Next, we used the new method with rats. Rats were first presented with a brief noise duration which they would subsequently classify as short or long. Rats were sometimes forced to take an immediate duration test, forced to repeat the same duration, or had the choice to take the test or repeat the duration. Metacognition, but not an alternative non-metacognition model, predicts that accuracy on difficult durations is higher when subjects are forced to repeat the stimulus compared to trials in which the subject chose to repeat the stimulus, a pattern observed in our data. Simulation of a non-metacognition model suggests that this part of the data from rats is consistent with metacognition, but other aspects of the data are not consistent with metacognition. The current results call into question previous findings suggesting that rats have metacognitive abilities. Although a mixed pattern of data does not support metacognition in rats, we believe the introduction of the method may be valuable for testing with other species to help evaluate the comparative case for metacognition.

Keywords

Metacognition Metacognitive control Simulations Rats 

References

  1. Basile BM, Hampton RR, Suomi SJ, Murray EA (2009) An assessment of memory awareness in tufted capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella). Anim Cogn 12:1169–1180Google Scholar
  2. Beran MJ, Smith JD, Coutinho MVC, Couchman JJ, Boomer J (2009) The psychological organization of “uncertainty” responses and “middle” responses: a dissociation in capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella). J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Proc 35:371–381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Budson AE, Dodson CS, Daffner KR, Schacter DL (2005) Metacognition and false recognition in Alzheimer’s disease: further exploration of the distinctiveness heuristic. Neuropsychology 19:253–258PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Call J (2010) Do apes know that they could be wrong? Anim Cogn 13:689–700PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Call J, Carpenter M (2001) Do apes and children know what they have seen? Anim Cogn 4:207–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cardinal RN, Pennicott DR, Sugathapala CL, Robbins TW, Everitt BJ (2001) Impulsive choice induced in rats by lesions of the nucleus accumbens core. Science 292:2499–2501PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Church RM, Deluty MZ (1977) Bisection of temporal intervals. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Proc 3:216–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Crystal JD, Foote AL (2009) Metacognition in animals. Comp Cogn Behav Rev 4:1–16Google Scholar
  9. Emery NJ, Clayton NS (2001) Effects of experience and social context on prospective caching strategies by scrub jays. Nature 414:443–446PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Foote AL, Crystal JD (2007) Metacognition in the rat. Curr Biol 17:551–555PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gibbon J (1981) On the form and location of the psychometric bisection function for time. J Math Psychol 24:58–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hampton RR (2001) Rhesus monkeys know when they remember. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 98:5359–5362PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hampton RR (2009) Multiple demonstrations of metacognition in nonhumans: converging evidence or multiple mechanisms? Comp Cogn Behav Rev 4:17–28PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Hampton RR, Zivin A, Murray EA (2004) Rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta) discriminate between knowing and not knowing and collect information as needed before acting. Anim Cogn 7:239–246PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Inman A, Shettleworth SJ (1999) Detecting metamemory in nonverbal subjects: a test with pigeons. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Proc 25:389–395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jozefowiez J, Cerutti DT, Staddon JER (2009a) The behavioral economics of choice and interval timing. Psychol Rev 116:519–539Google Scholar
  17. Jozefowiez J, Staddon JER, Cerutti DT. (2009b) Metacognition in animals: how do we know that they know? Comp Cogn Behav Rev 4:29–39Google Scholar
  18. Kelemen WL, Fulton EK (2008) Cigarette abstinence impairs memory and metacognition despite administration of 2 mg nicotine gum. Exp Clin Psychopharmacol 16:521–531PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kornell N (2009) Metacognition in humans and animals. Curr Dir Psychol Sci 18:11–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kornell N, Son L, Terrace H (2007) Transfer of metacognitive skills and hint seeking in monkeys. Psych Sci 18:64–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Mazur JE (1988) Choice between small certain and large uncertain reinforcers. Anim Learn Behav 16:199–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Mazur J (2007) Rats’ choices between one and two delayed reinforcers. Learn Behav 35:169–176PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. McMahon S, Macpherson K, Roberts WA (2010) Dogs choose a human informant: metacognition in canines. Behav Process 85:293–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Metcalfe J, Kober H (2005) Self-reflective consciousness and the projectable self. In: Terrace HS, Metcalfe J (eds) The missing link in cognition: origins of self-reflective consciousness. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 57–83Google Scholar
  25. Richards J, Mitchell S, de Wit H, Seiden L (1997) Determination of discount functions in rats with an adjusting-amount procedure. J Exp Anal Behav 67:353–366PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Roberts WA, Feeney MC, McMillan N, MacPherson K, Musolino E, Petter M (2009) Dopigeons (Columba livia) study for a test? J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Proc 35:129–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Roelofs J, Papageorgiou C, Gerber RD, Huibers M, Peeters F, Arntz A (2007) On the links between self-discrepancies, rumination, metacognitions, and symptoms of depression in undergraduates. Behav Res Ther 45:1295–1305PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Shepard RN (1961) Application of a trace model to the retention of information in a recognition task. Psychometrika 26:185–203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Shepard RN (1987) Toward a universal law of generalization for psychological science. Science 237:1317–1323PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Smith JD (2005) Studies of uncertainty monitoring and metacognition in animals and humans. In: Terrace HS, Metcalfe J (eds) The missing link in cognition: origins of self-reflective consciousness. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 242–271Google Scholar
  31. Smith JD (2009) The study of animal metacognition. Trends Cogn Sci 13:389–396PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Smith JD, Beran MJ, Redford JS, Washburn DA (2006) Dissociating uncertainty responses and reinforcement signals in the comparative study of uncertainty monitoring. J Exp Psychol Gen 135:282–297PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Smith JD, Beran MJ, Couchman JJ, Coutinho MVC (2008) The comparative study of metacognition: sharper paradigms, safer inferences. Psychon Bull Rev 15:679–691PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Smith JD, Redford JS, Beran MJ, Washburn DA (2010) Rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta) adaptively monitor uncertainty while multi-tasking. Anim Cogn 13:93–101PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sole LM, Shettleworth SJ, Bennett PJ (2003) Uncertainty in pigeons. Psychon Bull Rev 10:738–745PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Son LK, Kornell N (2005) Metaconfidence judgments in rhesus macaques: explicit versus implicit mechanisms. In: Terrace HS, Metcalfe J (eds) The missing link in cognition: origins of self-reflective consciousness. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 296–320Google Scholar
  37. Sutton JE, Shettleworth SJ (2008) Memory without awareness: pigeons do not show metamemory in delayed matching-to-sample. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Proc 34:266–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Washburn DA, Gulledge JP, Beran MJ, Smith JD (2010) With his memory magnetically erased, a monkey knows he is uncertain. Biol Lett 6:163–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. White KG (2002) Psychophysics of remembering: the discrimination hypothesis. Curr Dir Psychol Sci 11:141–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of GeorgiaAthensUSA
  2. 2.Department of Psychological and Brain SciencesIndiana UniversityBloomingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations