Baboons (Papio papio), but not humans, break cognitive set in a visuomotor task
- 271 Downloads
Cognitive set can be both helpful and harmful in problem solving. A large set of similar problems may be solved mechanically by applying a single-solution method. However, efficiency might be sacrificed if a better solution exists and is overlooked. Despite half a century of research on cognitive set, there have been no attempts to investigate whether it occurs in nonhuman species. The current study utilized a nonverbal, computer task to compare cognitive set between 104 humans and 15 baboons (Papio papio). A substantial difference was found between humans’ and baboons’ abilities to break cognitive set. Consistent with previous studies, the majority of humans were highly impaired by set, yet baboons were almost completely unaffected. Analysis of the human data revealed that children (aged 7–10) were significantly better able to break set than adolescents (11–18) and adults (19–68). Both the evolutionary and developmental implications of these findings are discussed.
KeywordsCognitive set Baboons Einstellung Problem solving Strategies Comparative
We are grateful to the staff of the CNRS Station de Primatologie (Rousset, France), especially Romain Lacoste and Jean-Christophe Marin, for technical assistance. Marianne Jover and Gérard Meguerditchian are acknowledged for their help in the pilot study. We thank the Zoo Atlanta staff, especially our staff liason Joseph Mendelson, for help and hospitality. S. Pope is funded by the Chateaubriand Fellowship from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Development as well as Georgia State University’s Second Century Initiative Primate Social Cognition, Evolution, and Behavior fellowship. A Meguerditchian is funded by the French National Ambassy Agency (ANR “LangPrimate”) Grant reference ANR-12-PDOC-0014_01. W. Hopkins is funded by National Institutes of Health grants: NS-73134 and HD-60563. J. Fagot is funded by the Premilang2″ ANR Grant ANR-13-BSH2-0002-01.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors certify that this research was conducted with no financial, commercial, or other pursuits, which could be construed as potential conflicts of interest.
- Crooks NM, McNeil NM (2009) Increased practice with ‘set’ problems hinders performance on the water jar task. In: Proceedings of the 31st annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Amsterdam, the Netherland, July 29-1. http://csjarchive.cogsci.rpi.edu/proceedings/2009/papers/114/Index.html
- Cunningham JD (1965) Einstellung rigidity in children. J Exp Child Psychol 2:237–247Google Scholar
- Duncker K, Lees LS (1945) On problem-solving. Psychol Monogr 58(5):iGoogle Scholar
- Henderson KB, Pingry RE (1953) Problem-solving in mathematics. In: Fehr HF (ed) The learning of mathematics its theory and practice. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Reston, Virginia, pp 228–270Google Scholar
- Janzen HL, Maguire TO, Boersma FJ (1976) A developmental analysis of set patterns in children: a normative study. In: Proceedings of the American Educational Research Association. San Francisco, California, 19–23 April. http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED124861
- Milgram S (1974) Obedience to authority. Harper and Row, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Rosenthal R, Rosnow RL (1969) Artifact in behavioral research, vol 121. Academic Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Sweller J, Levine M (1982) Effects of goal specificity on means–ends analysis and learning. J Exp Psychol Learn 8:463-474Google Scholar