Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Foundations of Metacognition$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

Michael J. Beran, Johannes Brandl, Josef Perner, and Joëlle Proust

Print publication date: 2012

Print ISBN-13: 9780199646739

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: January 2013

DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199646739.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2019. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use (for details see www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy).date: 17 June 2019

Validating animal models of metacognition

Validating animal models of metacognition

Chapter:
(p.36) Chapter 2 Validating animal models of metacognition
Source:
Foundations of Metacognition
Author(s):

Jonathon D. Crystal

Publisher:
Oxford University Press
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199646739.003.0003

The comparative analysis of metacognition is a pathway towards uncovering fundamental information about the evolution of mind. A substantial amount of research has been directed towards this goal in the last 15 years. However, progress in the comparative analysis of metacognition is threatened by conflicting views about the standards required to document metacognition in animals. Consequently, the goal of this chapter is to outline some ideas about what type of evidence is required to validate an animal model of metacognition. The first part of this chapter provides a brief review of examples of metacognition. The second part of this chapter analyses these experiments with respect to two types of hypotheses: the first proposal is that the subject has the capacity of metacognition; the second proposal is that the subject is not capable of metacognition but solves the problem using basic learning mechanisms. The next section outlines some examples of conflicting views about interpretation of metacognition experiments. The chapter concludes by recommending the use of simulations from computational models of proposed psychological processes (i.e. metacognition and non-metacognition) to determine if a particular pattern of data may be explained by metacognition or alternative hypotheses. This approach may be used to increase our confidence that putative evidence of metacognition is indeed based on the capacity of metacognition.

Keywords:   metacognition, evolution of mind, comparative psychology, animal models, learning mechanisms, computational models, simulations

Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .