Another theory of mind experiment
Dean Walker
>>A couple of months ago, I tuned into a show on animal cognition. One of
>>the vignettes featured research regarding the cognitive abilities of
>>chimpanzees. One of the studies featured floored me at the time. I'll
>>attempt to give an account from memory - aplogies ahead of time for my
>>inability to remember the name of the show or the particular researcher.
>>
>>One researcher was purportedly investigating whether chimps had a "theory
>>of mind". To test this, the performance of chimps and young human
>>Both the children and the chimps were taught to expect treats to be
>>hidden in various places in the testing room. Once this was done, a new
>>element was introduced. When the children or the chimps entered the
>>room, a human participant indicated through the use of gestures where the
>>treat was hidden. Young human children picked up on the cues immediately
>>and went right to the spot indicated by the "cuer". The chimps'
>>performance continued to be that of a trial and error approach that
>>indicated that the cues given by the human participant were not being
>>noticed and/or heeded.
Other animals also have ways of communicating with their associates. Bees
who find a food source have chemical signals which tell the others in the
hive where that food source is. And as F. E. Dang just pointed out, chimps
can use available implements to reach the bananas -- something that human
children don't do.
The theory of evolution is supported by some scientific evidence, but the
Fundamentalists consider it un-Christian -- a problem that goes back to
the Scopes Trial. In some respects, the conflict between science and
religion goes back to the time when Galileo's findings angered the Pope.
The two posts by Steve Drake and F.E.Dang only show that there is a comflict
between Christian belief and the Animal Rights belief system. So what else
is new?
Stephen N. Drake
> "Stephen N. Drake" <snd...@MAILBOX.SYR.EDU> wrote:
> >A couple of months ago, I tuned into a show on animal cognition. One of
> >the vignettes featured research regarding the cognitive abilities of
> >chimpanzees. One of the studies featured floored me at the time. I'll
> >attempt to give an account from memory - aplogies ahead of time for my
> >inability to remember the name of the show or the particular researcher.
> >
> >One researcher was purportedly investigating whether chimps had a "theory
> >of mind". To test this, the performance of chimps and young human
> >children were compared in the following activity:
> >
> >Both the children and the chimps were taught to expect treats to be
> >hidden in various places in the testing room. Once this was done, a new
> >element was introduced. When the children or the chimps entered the
> >room, a human participant indicated through the use of gestures where the
> >treat was hidden. Young human children picked up on the cues immediately
> >and went right to the spot indicated by the "cuer". The chimps'
> >performance continued to be that of a trial and error approach that
> >indicated that the cues given by the human participant were not being
> >noticed and/or heeded. On the basis of this test, the researcher has
> >concluded that chimps lack a "theory of mind".
> >
> >Of course, one could alternatively hypothesize that what the experiment
> >*actually* demonstrated was that human children were much better at
> >interpreting the gestural cues of an adult of their species than chimps
> >were when expected to interpret the body language of a *different*
> >species. This alternative hypothesis doesn't seem to have occurred to
> >either the researcher in question or the producers of the show.
> >
> >Anyone else see any (ahem) simian-larities between this situation and
> >theory of mind tests with autistic people?
> >
> >Steve
>
>
> Steve,
>
> Do you recall how the experimenters defined "theory of mind" .
>
I beleive they were defining it as the ability to realize that others
have mental states.
> What appears obvious is that with the two subject groups, human children and
> chimpanzees, the children should be able to follow gestures/cues from the
> adults.
> The chimpanzees on the other hand would not be able to. Why, The children
have
> learned through living with their parents the different gestures/cues that
> humans
> utilize as part of the normal communications. Chimpanzees on the other hand,
> probably have no learning time regarding human communications. The
interesting
> thing with Champanzees is that put them in a cage with bananas laying outside
> of the
> cage just out of reach. Put various tools, broom, chairs and other assorted
> things
> (I forgot what else was in the cage...it's been a long time since I first read
> this study)
> and the chimpanzee will utilize the various impliments to reach the bananas.
> Children, on the other hand, being in age similiar to the chimpanzees, did not
> utilize
> the tools and soon after gave up reaching for the banana's ( they might have
> used
> something else).
>
> I think the study you mentioned was poorly done.
>
I am not sure if it was poorly *done* - it sure as heck demonstrated some
real differences between young chimps and children. The *interpretation*
of the data, along with the original hypothesis being investigated -
seems to have gone way beyond the data.
Just to avoid any misinterpretations - I was not looking for similarities
between chimps and kids with autism - I was struck by the similarities in
the researchers involved in "theory of mind" tests.
Steve
Chuck Stewart
Please remember that cognition begins with sensation and perception - what
comes in through our eyes and ears. I don't see any similarity between chimps
and autistics in the experiment, because of a basic assumption we must make:
that the chimps eyes, ears, and brains were functioning normally. With
autistics, there may be sensory problems as well as problems in cognitive
processing.
Chuck Stewart