Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-59b7f5684b-z9m8x Total loading time: 0.849 Render date: 2022-09-25T15:58:05.980Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "displayNetworkTab": true, "displayNetworkMapGraph": false, "useSa": true } hasContentIssue true

Darwin's mistake: Explaining the discontinuity between human and nonhuman minds

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 May 2008

Derek C. Penn
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of California–Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095; Cognitive Evolution Group, University of Louisiana, Lafayette, LA 70504dcpenn@ucla.eduhttp://reasoninglab.psych.ucla.edu/http://www.cognitiveevolutiongroup.org/
Keith J. Holyoak
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of California–Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095holyoak@lifesci.ucla.eduhttp://reasoninglab.psych.ucla.edu/
Daniel J. Povinelli
Affiliation:
Cognitive Evolution Group, University of Louisiana, Lafayette, LA 70504ceg@louisiana.eduhttp://www.cognitiveevolutiongroup.org/

Abstract

Over the last quarter century, the dominant tendency in comparative cognitive psychology has been to emphasize the similarities between human and nonhuman minds and to downplay the differences as “one of degree and not of kind” (Darwin 1871). In the present target article, we argue that Darwin was mistaken: the profound biological continuity between human and nonhuman animals masks an equally profound discontinuity between human and nonhuman minds. To wit, there is a significant discontinuity in the degree to which human and nonhuman animals are able to approximate the higher-order, systematic, relational capabilities of a physical symbol system (PSS) (Newell 1980). We show that this symbolic-relational discontinuity pervades nearly every domain of cognition and runs much deeper than even the spectacular scaffolding provided by language or culture alone can explain. We propose a representational-level specification as to where human and nonhuman animals' abilities to approximate a PSS are similar and where they differ. We conclude by suggesting that recent symbolic-connectionist models of cognition shed new light on the mechanisms that underlie the gap between human and nonhuman minds.

Type
Main Articles
Copyright
Copyright ©Cambridge University Press 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Altmann, G. T. M., Dienes, Z. N. & Goode, A. (1995) Modality independence of implicitly learned grammatical knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 21(4):899912.Google Scholar
Andrews, G. & Halford, G. S. (2002) A cognitive complexity metric applied to cognitive development. Cognitive Psychology 45(2):153219.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Aydede, M. (1997) Language of thought: The connectionist contribution. Minds and Machines 7:57101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baldo, J. V., Dronkers, N. F., Wilkins, D., Ludy, C., Raskin, P. & Kim, J. (2005) Is problem solving dependent on language? Brain and Language 92(3):240–50.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barkow, J. H., Cosmides, L. & Tooby, J. (1992) The adapted mind: Evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Barrett, H. C. (2005) Enzymatic computation and cognitive modularity. Mind and Language 20(3):259–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barrett, H. C. & Kurzban, R. (2006) Modularity in cognition: Framing the debate. Psychological Review 113:628–47.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barsalou, L. W. (1999) Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22(4):577660.Google ScholarPubMed
Bekoff, M., Allen, C. & Burghardt, G., eds. (2002) The cognitive animal MIT Press.Google Scholar
Bergman, T. J., Beehner, J. C., Cheney, D. L. & Seyfarth, R. M. (2003) Hierarchical classification by rank and kinship in baboons. Science 302(5648):1234–36.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bermúdez, J. L. (2003) Thinking without words Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bermúdez, J. L. (2005) Philosophy of psychology: A contemporary introduction Routledge.Google Scholar
Bickerton, D. (1995) Language and human behavior University of Washington Press.Google Scholar
Blackmon, J., Byrd, D., Cummins, D. D., Poirier, P. & Roth, M. (2004) Atomistic learning in non-modular systems. Philosophical Psychology 18(3):313–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blair, M., Marczinski, C. A., Davis-Faroque, N. & Kertesz, A. (2007) A longitudinal study of language decline in Alzheimer's disease and frontotemporal dementia. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society 13(2):237–45.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Blaisdell, A. P. & Cook, R. G. (2005) Two-item same-different concept learning in pigeons. Learning and Behavior 33(1):6777.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Blaisdell, A. P., Sawa, K., Leising, K. J. & Waldmann, M. R. (2006) Causal reasoning in rats. Science 311(5763):1020–22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bloom, P. (1994) Generativity within language and other cognitive domains. Cognition 51:177–89.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bloom, P. (2000) Language and thought: Does grammar makes us smart? Current Biology 10(14):R516–17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bloom, P. & Keil, F. C. (2001) Thinking through language. Mind and Language 16(4):351–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bloom, P. & Wynn, K. (1997) Linguistic cues in the acquisition of number words. Journal of Child Language 24:511–33.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bond, A. B., Kamil, A. C. & Balda, R. P. (2003) Social complexity and transitive inference in corvids. Animal Behaviour 65(3):479–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bovet, D. & Vauclair, J. (2001) Judgement of conceptual identity in monkeys. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 8:470–75.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brooks, R. A. (1991) Intelligence without representation. Artificial Intelligence 47:139–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bryant, P. E. & Trabasso, T. (1971) Transitive inferences and memory in young children. Nature 232:456–58.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bugnyar, T. & Heinrich, B. (2005) Ravens, Corvus corax, differentiate between knowledgeable and ignorant competitors. Proceedings of the Royal Society, London B: Biological Sciences 272(1573):1641–46.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bugnyar, T. & Heinrich, B. (2006) Pilfering ravens, Corvus corax, adjust their behaviour to social context and identity of competitors. Animal Cognition 9(4):369–76.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Byrne, R. W. & Russon, A. E. (1998) Learning by imitation: A hierarchical approach. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:667–84.Google Scholar
Call, J. (2004) Inferences about the location of food in the great apes (Pan paniscus, Pan troglodytes, Gorilla gorilla, and Pongo pygmaeus). Journal of Comparative Psychology 118(2):232–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Call, J. (2006) Descartes' two errors: Reason and reflection in the great apes. In: Rational animals?, ed. Hurley, S. & Nudds, M.. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Carey, S. (1985) Conceptual change in childhood MIT Press.Google Scholar
Carruthers, P. (2002) The cognitive functions of language. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25(6):657726.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carruthers, P. (2004) On being simple minded. American Philosophical Quarterly 41(3):205–20.Google Scholar
Carruthers, P. (2005a) Distinctively human thinking: Modular precursors and components. In: The innate mind: Structure and content, ed. Carruthers, P., Laurence, S. & Stich, S. P., pp. 6988. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carruthers, P. (2005b) The case for massively modular models of mind. In: Contemporary debates in cognitive science, ed. Stainton, R., pp. 205–25. Blackwell.Google Scholar
Carruthers, P. & Smith, P. K., eds. (1996) Theories of theory of mind Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castro, L., Young, M. E. & Wasserman, E. A. (2007) Effects of number of items and visual display variability on same-different discrimination behavior. Memory and Cognition 34:16891703.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chalmers, D. J. (1990) Syntactic transformation on distributed representations. Connection Science 2 (1&2):5362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cheney, D. L. & Seyfarth, R. M. (1998) Why animals don't have language. In: The Tanner lectures on human values, ed. Peterson, G. B., pp. 175209. University of Utah Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1980) Rules and representations Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1995) The minimalist program MIT Press.Google Scholar
Christiansen, M. H. & Kirby, S. (2003) Language evolution: Consensus and controversies. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 7(7):300307.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clark, A. (1997) Being there: Putting brain, body and world together again MIT Press.Google Scholar
Clark, A. (2001) Reasons, robots and the extended mind. Mind and Language 16(2):121–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, A. (2006) Language, embodiment, and the cognitive niche. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 10(8):370–74.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clayton, N. S., Bussey, T. J. & Dickinson, A. (2003) Can animals recall the past and plan for the future? Nature Reviews Neuroscience 4(8):685–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clayton, N. S., Griffiths, D. P., Emery, N. J. & Dickinson, A. (2001) Elements of episodic-like memory in animals. The Royal Society 356:1483–91.Google ScholarPubMed
Cook, R. G. & Wasserman, E. A. (2006) Relational discrimination learning in pigeons. In: Comparative cognition: Experimental explorations in animal intelligence, ed. Wasserman, E. A. & Zentall, T. R., pp. 307–24. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cook, R. G. & Wasserman, E. A. (in press) Discrimination and transfer of higher-order same/different relations by pigeons. Psychonomic Bulletin and ReviewGoogle Scholar
Dally, J. M., Emery, N. J. & Clayton, N. S. (2006) Food-caching western scrub-jays keep track of who was watching when. Science 312(5780):1662–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Darwin, C. (1871) The descent of man, and selection in relation to sex. John Murray.Google Scholar
Dehaene, S. (1997) The number sense Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
DeLillo, C., Floreano, D. & Antinucci, F. (2001) Transitive choices by a simple, fully connected, backpropagation neural network: Implications for the comparative study of transitive inference. Animal Cognition 4:6168.Google Scholar
DeLoache, J. S. (2004) Becoming symbol-minded. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 8(2):6670.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dennett, D. C. (1996) Kinds of minds: Toward an understanding of consciousness, 1st edition. Basic Books.Google Scholar
deVilliers, J., (2000) Language and theory of mind: What is the developmental relationship? In: Understanding other minds: Perspectives from autism and developmental cognitive neuroscience, ed. Baron-Cohen, S., Tager-Flusberg, H. & Cohen, D. J.. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
de Waal, F. B. M. & Tyack, P. L. (2003) Animal social complexity: Intelligence, culture and individualized societies Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donald, M. (2001) A mind so rare: The evolution of human consciousness Norton.Google Scholar
Doumas, L. A. & Hummel, J. E. (2005) Approaches to modeling human mental representations: What works, what doesn't and why. In: The Cambridge handbook of thinking and reasoning, ed. Holyoak, K. J. & Morrison, R. G., pp. 7394. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Eliasmith, C. & Thagard, P. (2001) Integrating structure and meaning: A distributed model of analogical mapping. Cognitive Science 25:245–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elman, J. L. (1996) Rethinking innateness: A connectionist perspective on development MIT Press.Google Scholar
Emery, N. J. (2004) Are corvids “feathered apes”? Cognitive evolution in crows, jays, rooks and jackdaws. In: Comparative analysis of minds, ed. Watanabe, S., pp. 181213. Keio University Press.Google Scholar
Emery, N. J. & Clayton, N. S. (2001) Effects of experience and social context on prospective caching strategies by scrub-jays. Nature 414:443–46.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Emery, N. J. & Clayton, N. S. (2004b) The mentality of crows: Convergent evolution of intelligence in corvids and apes. Science 306(5703):1903–907.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Emery, N. J. & Clayton, N. S. (in press) How to build a scrub-jay that reads minds. In: Origins of the social mind: Evolutionary and developmental views, ed. Itakura, S. & Fujita, K.. Springer.Google Scholar
Evans, J. (2003) In two minds: Dual-process accounts of reasoning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 17(10):454–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fagot, J., Wasserman, E. A. & Young, M. E. (2001) Discriminating the relation between relations: The role of entropy in abstract conceptualization by baboons (Papio papio) and humans (Homo sapiens). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes 27(4):316–28.Google Scholar
Flombaum, J. I. & Santos, L. R. (2005) Rhesus monkeys attribute perceptions to others. Current Biology 15(5):447–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fodor, J. A. (1975) The language of thought Crowell.Google Scholar
Fodor, J. A. (1997) Connectionism and the problem of systematicity (continued): Why Smolensky's solution still doesn't work. Cognition 62:109–19.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fodor, J. A. (2000) The mind doesn't work that way: The scope and limits of computational psychology MIT Press.Google Scholar
Fodor, J. A. & McLaughlin, B. (1990) Connectionism and systematicity. Cognition 35:183204.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fodor, J. A. & Pylyshyn, Z. (1988) Connectionism and cognitive architecture: A critical analysis. Cognition 28:371.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fragaszy, D. M. & Cummins-Sebree, S. E. (2005) Relational spatial reasoning by a nonhuman: The example of capuchin monkeys. Behavioral and Cognitive Neuroscience Reviews 4(4):282306.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fragaszy, D. M., Galloway, A. T., Johnson-Pynn, J. & Brakke, K. (2002) The sources of skill in seriating cups in children, monkeys and apes. Developmental Science 5(1):118–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fries, P., Nikolic, D. & Singer, W. (2007) The gamma cycle. Trends in Neuroscience 30(7):309–16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gallistel, C. R. (2006) The nature of learning and the functional architecture of the brain. In: Psychological science around the world. Proceedings of the 28th International Congress of Psychology, Beijing, ed. Jing, Q., Rosenzweig, M. R., d'Ydewalle, G., Zhang, H., Chen, H.-C. & Zhang, K.. Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Garfield, J. L., Peterson, C. C. & Perry, T. (2001) Social cognition, language acquisition and the development of the theory of mind. Mind and Language 16(5):494541.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gattis, M. (2005) Inferencing from spatial information. Spatial Cognition and Computation 5:119–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gentner, D. (1977) If a tree had a knee, where would it be? Children's performance on simple spatial metaphors. Papers and Reports on Child Language Development 13:157–64.Google Scholar
Gentner, D. (1983) Structure-mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science 7:155–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gentner, D. (2003) Why we're so smart. In: Language in mind: Advances in the study of language and thought, ed. Gentner, D. & Goldin-Meadow, S., pp. 195235. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Gentner, D., Holyoak, K. J. & Kokinov, B. N., eds. (2001) The analogical mind: Perspectives from cognitive science MIT Press.Google Scholar
Gentner, D. & Markman, A. B. (1997) Structure mapping in analogy and similarity. American Psychologist 52:4556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gentner, D. & Rattermann, M. J. (1991) Language and the career of similarity. In: Perspectives on language and thought: Interrelations in development, ed. Gelman, S. A. & Byrnes, J. P., pp. 225–77. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gick, M. L. & Holyoak, K. J. (1980) Analogical problem solving. Cognitive Psychology 12:306–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gick, M. L. & Holyoak, K. J. (1983) Schema induction and analogical transfer. Cognitive Psychology 15:138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gillan, D. J. (1981) Reasoning in the chimpanzee: II. Transitive inference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes 7(2):150–64.Google Scholar
Gillan, D. J., Premack, D. & Woodruff, G. (1981) Reasoning in the chimpanzee: I. Analogical reasoning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes 7:117.Google Scholar
Goldin-Meadow, S. (2003) The resilience of language: What gesture creation in deaf children can tell us about how all children learn language Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Goldvarg, Y. & Johnson-Laird, P. (2001) Naive causality: A mental model theory of causal meaning and reasoning. Cognitive Science 25:565610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gomez, R. L. (1997) Transfer and complexity in artificial grammar learning. Cognitive Psychology 33(2):154207.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gomez, R. L. & Gerken, L. (2000) Infant artificial language learning and language acquisition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 4(5):178–86.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goodwin, G. P. & Johnson-Laird, P. (2005) Reasoning about relations. Psychological Review 112(2):468–93.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gopnik, A., Glymour, C., Sobel, D., Schulz, L., Kushnir, T. & Danks, D. (2004) A theory of causal learning in children: Causal maps and Bayes nets. Psychological Review 111(1):131.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gopnik, A. & Meltzoff, A. N. (1997) Words, thoughts, and theories, MIT Press.Google Scholar
Goswami, U. (1992) Analogical reasoning in children Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Goswami, U. (2001) Analogical reasoning in children. In: The analogical mind, ed. Gentner, D., Holyoak, K. J. & Kokinov, B. N.. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Goswami, U. & Brown, A. L. (1989) Melting chocolate and melting snowmen: Analogical reasoning and causal relations. Cognition 35(1):6995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goswami, U. & Brown, A. L. (1990) Higher-order structure and relational reasoning: Contrasting analogical and thematic relations. Cognition 36(3):207–26.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Greenfield, P. M. (1991) Language, tools and the brain: The ontogeny and phylogeny of hierarchically organized sequential behavior. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14:531–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gregory, C., Lough, S., Stone, V., Erzinclioglu, S., Martin, L., Baron-Cohen, S. & Hodges, J. R. (2002) Theory of mind in patients with frontal variant frontotemporal dementia and Alzheimer's disease: Theoretical and practical implications. Brain 125 (Pt 4):752–64.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grosenick, L., Clement, T. S. & Fernald, R. D. (2007) Fish can infer social rank by observation alone. Nature 445(7126):429–32.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hadley, R. F. (1994) Systematicity in connectionist language learning. Mind and Language 9:247–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hadley, R. F. (1997) Cognition, systematicity and nomic necessity. Mind and Language 12(2):137–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hagmayer, Y., Sloman, S. A., Lagnado, D. A. & Waldmann, M. R. (2007) Causal reasoning through intervention. In: Causal learning: Psychology, philosophy and computation, ed. Gopnik, A. & Schulz, L.. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hagmayer, Y. & Waldmann, M. R. (2004) Seeing the unobservable: Inferring the probability and impact of hidden causes. In: Proceedings of the 26th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, pp. 523–28. Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Halford, G. S. (1984) Can young children integrate premises in transitivity and serial order tasks? Cognitive Psychology 16:6593.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halford, G. S. (1993) Children's understanding: The development of mental models Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Halford, G. S., Wilson, W. H. & Phillips, S. (1998a) Processing capacity defined by relational complexity: Implications for comparative, developmental, and cognitive psychology. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21(6):803–31; discussion 831–64.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Halford, G. S., Wilson, W. H. & Phillips, S. (1998b) Relational complexity metric is effective when assessments are based on actual cognitive processes. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21(6):848–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hare, B., Call, J., Agnetta, B. & Tomasello, M. (2000) Chimpanzees know what conspecifics do and do not see. Animal Behaviour 59(4):771–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hare, B., Call, J. & Tomasello, M. (2001) Do chimpanzees know what conspecifics know? Animal Behaviour 61(1):771–85.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hauser, M. D., Chomsky, N. & Fitch, W. T. (2002a) The faculty of language: What is it, who has it and how did it evolve? Science 298(5598):1569–79.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hauser, M. D., Weiss, D. & Marcus, G. (2002b) Rule learning by cotton-top tamarins. Cognition 86(1):B1522.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Herman, L. M., Pack, A. A. & Morrel-Samuels, P. (1993b) Representational and conceptual skills of dolphins. In: Language and communication: Comparative perspectives, ed. Roitblat, H. R., Herman, L. M. & Nachtigall, P., pp. 273–98. Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Herman, L. M., Richards, D. G. & Wolz, J. P. (1984) Comprehension of sentences by bottlenosed dolphins. Cognition 16:129219.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Heyes, C. M. (1998) Theory of mind in nonhuman primates. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21(1):101–14; discussion 115–48.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Heyes, C. M. & Papineau, D. (2006) Rational or associative? Imitation in Japanese quail. In: Rational animals? ed. Nudds, M. & Hurley, S.. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hinton, G. E., McClelland, J. L. & Rumelhart, D. E. (1986) Distributed representations. In: Parallel distributed processing: Explorations in the microstructure of cognition. Vol. I: Foundations, ed. Rumelhart, D. E., McClelland, J. L. & the PDP. Research Group, pp. 77109. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hogue, M. E., Beaugrand, J. P. & Lague, P. C. (1996) Coherent use of information by hens observing their former dominant defeating or being defeated by a stranger. Behavioral Processes 38:241–52.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Holyoak, K. J. (1991) Symbolic connectionism: Toward third-generation theories of expertise. In: Toward a general theory of expertise: Prospects and limits, ed. Ericsson, K. A. & Smith, J., pp. 301335. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Holyoak, K. J. & Hummel, J. E. (2000) The proper treatment of symbols in a connectionist architecture. In: Cognitive dynamics: Conceptual change in humans and machines, ed. Dietrich, E. & Markman, A. B., pp. 229–63. Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Holyoak, K. J. & Hummel, J. E. (2001) Toward an understanding of analogy within a biological symbol system. In: The analogical mind: Perspectives from cognitive science, ed. Gentner, D., Holyoak, K. J. & Kokinov, B. N.. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Holyoak, K. J., Junn, E. N. & Billman, D. (1984) Development of analogical problem-solving skill. Child Development 55:2042–55.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Holyoak, K. J. & Thagard, P. (1995) Mental leaps: Analogy in creative thought MIT Press.Google Scholar
Holyoak, K. J. & Thagard, P. (1997) The analogical mind. American Psychologist 52(1):3544.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Horgan, T. & Tienson, J. (1996) Connectionism and the philosophy of psychology MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hummel, J. E. & Holyoak, K. J. (1997) Distributed representations of structure: A theory of analogical access and mapping. Psychological Review 104:427–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hummel, J. E. & Holyoak, K. J. (2001) A process model of human transitive inference. In: Spatial schemas in abstract thought, ed. Gattis, M., pp. 279305. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hummel, J. E. & Holyoak, K. J. (2003) A symbolic-connectionist theory of relational inference and generalization. Psychological Review 110:220–64.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hummel, J. E. & Holyoak, K. J. (2005) Relational reasoning in a neurally plausible cognitive architecture. Current Directions in Psychological Science 14(3):153–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hummel, J. E., Holyoak, K. J., Green, C., Doumas, L. A. A., Devnich, D., Kittur, A. & Kalar, D. J. (2004) A solution to the binding problem for compositional connectionism. In: Compositional connectionism in cognitive science: Papers from the AAAI Fall Symposium, ed. Levy, S. D. & Gayler, R., pp. 3134. AAAI Press.Google Scholar
Inhelder, B. & Piaget, J. (1964) The early growth of logic in the child Routledge and Kegan-Paul.Google Scholar
Jackendoff, R. (2002) Foundations of language: Brain, meaning, grammar, evolution Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
James, W. (1890/1950) The principles of psychology, vol. 1. Dover Publications.Google Scholar
Johnson-Frey, S. H. (2004) The neural bases of complex tool use in humans. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 8(2):7178.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Johnson-Pynn, J. & Fragaszy, D. M. (2001) Do apes and monkeys rely upon conceptual reversibility? Animal Cognition 4 (3–4):315–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Johnson-Pynn, J., Fragaszy, D. M., Hirsh, E. M., Brakke, K. E. & Greenfield, P. M. (1999) Strategies used to combine seriated cups by chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes), bonobos (Pan paniscus), and capuchins (Cebus apella). Journal of Comparative Psychology 113(2):137–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jung, R. E. & Haier, R. J. (2007) The parieto-frontal integration theory (P-FIT) of intelligence: Converging neuroimaging evidence. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 30(2):135–87.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kacelnik, A. (2006) Meanings of rationality. In: Rational animals? ed. Hurley, S. & Nudds, M.. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kako, E. (1999) Elements of syntax in the systems of three language-trained animals. Animal Learning and Behavior 27:114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kamil, A. C. (2004) Sociality and the evolution of intelligence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 8(5):195–97.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Karmiloff-Smith, A. (1992) Beyond modularity: A developmental perspective on cognitive science MIT Press.Google Scholar
Katz, J. S. & Wright, A. A. (2006) Same/different abstract-concept learning by pigeons. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Proceedings 32(1):8086.Google ScholarPubMed
Katz, J. S., Wright, A. A. & Bachevalier, J. (2002) Mechanisms of same/different abstract-concept learning by rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes 28(4):358–68.Google Scholar
Keil, F. (1989) Concepts, kinds and cognitive development MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kroger, J. K., Holyoak, K. J. & Hummel, J. E. (2004) Varieties of sameness: The impact of relational complexity on perceptual comparisons. Cognitive Science 28(3):335–58.Google Scholar
Kuhlmeier, V. A. & Boysen, S. T. (2001) The effect of response contingencies on scale model task performance by chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). Journal of Comparative Psychology 115(3):300306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuhlmeier, V. A. & Boysen, S. T. (2002) Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) recognize spatial and object correspondences between a scale model and its referent. Psychological Science 13(1):6063.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kuhlmeier, V. A., Boysen, S. T. & Mukobi, K. L. (1999) Scale-model comprehension by chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). Journal of Comparative Psychology 113(4):396402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kushnir, T., Gopnik, A., Schulz, L. & Danks, D. (2003) Inferring hidden causes. Proceedings of the Twenty-Fifth Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, ed. Alterman, R. & Kirsh, D.. Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Lazareva, O. F., Smirnova, A. A., Bagozkaja, M. S., Zorina, Z. A., Rayevsky, V. V. & Wasserman, E. A. (2004) Transitive responding in hooded crows requires linearly ordered stimuli. Journal of Experimental Analysis of Behavior 82(1):119.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lazareva, O. F. & Wasserman, E. A. (2006) Effect of stimulus orderability and reinforcement history on transitive responding in pigeons. Behavioral Processes 72(2):161–72.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lee, H. S. & Holyoak, K. J. (2007) Causal models guide analogical inference. In: Proceedings of the Twenty-ninth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, ed. McNamara, D. S. & Trafton, G.. Cognitive Science Society.Google Scholar
Lien, Y. & Cheng, P. W. (2000) Distinguishing genuine from spurious causes: A coherence hypothesis. Cognitive Psychology 40(2):87137.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Limongelli, L., Boysen, S. T. & Visalberghi, E. (1995) Comprehension of cause-effect relations in a tool-using task by chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). Journal of Comparative Psychology 109:1896.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loewenstein, J. & Gentner, D. (2005) Relational language and the development of relational mapping. Cognitive Psychology 50(4):315–53.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lu, H., Morrison, R. G., Hummel, J. E. & Holyoak, K. J. (2006) Role of gamma-band synchronization in priming of form discrimination for multiobject displays. Journal of Experimental Psychology; Human Perception and Performance 32(3):610–17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marcus, G. F. (1999) Do infants learn grammar with algebra or statistics? Response to Seidenberg and Elman, Negishi and Eimas. Science 284:436–37.Google Scholar
Marcus, G. F. (2001) The algebraic mind: Integrating connectionism and cognitive science MIT Press.Google Scholar
Marcus, G. F., Vijayan, S., Bandi Rao, S. & Vishton, P. M. (1999) Rule learning by seven-month-old infants. Science 283(5398):7780.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Markman, A. B. & Dietrich, E. (2000) In defense of representation. Cognitive Psychology 40:138–71.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Markman, A. B. & Gentner, D. (1993) Structural alignment during similarity comparisons. Cognitive Psychology 25(4):431–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Markman, A. B. & Gentner, D. (2000) Structure mapping in the comparison process. American Journal of Psychology 113(4):501–38.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Markman, A. B. & Stilwell, C. H. (2001) Role-governed categories. Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Artificial Intelligence 13(4):329–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matsuzawa, T. (1996) Chimpanzee intelligence in nature and in captivity: Isomorphism of symbol use and tool use. In: Great ape societies, ed. McGrew, W. C., Marchant, L. F. & Nishida, T., pp. 196209. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matsuzawa, T. (2001) Primate origins of human cognition and behavior Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McClelland, J. L. & Plaut, D. C. (1999) Does generalization in infant learning implicate abstract algebra-like rules? Trends in Cognitive Sciences 3:166–68.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McElreath, R., Clutton-Brock, T. H., Fehr, E., Fessler, D. M. T., Hagen, E. H., Hammerstein, P., Kosfeld, M., Milinski, M., Silk, J. B., Tooby, J. & Wilson, M. (2003) Group report: The role of cognition and emotion in cooperation. In: Genetic and cultural evolution of cooperation, ed. Hammerstein, P.. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Menzel, R., Greggers, U., Smith, A., Berger, S., Brandt, R., Brunke, S., Bundrock, G., Hülse, S., Plümpe, T., Schaupp, F., Schüttler, E., Stach, S., Stindt, J., Stollhoff, N. & Watzl, S. (2005) Honeybees navigate according to a map-like spatial memory. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 102(8):3040–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mercado, E. III, Killebrew, D. A., Pack, A. A., Macha, I. I. & Herman, L. M. (2000) Generalization of “same-different” classification abilities in bottlenosed dolphins. Behavioural Processes 50 (2–3):7994.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mithen, S. (1996) The prehistory of the mind Hudson.Google Scholar
Morrison, R. G., Krawczyk, D. C., Holyoak, K. J., Hummel, J. E., Chow, T. W., Miller, B. L. & Knowlton, B. J. (2004) A neurocomputational model of analogical reasoning and its breakdown in frontotemporal lobar degeneration. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 16(2):260–71.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mulcahy, N. J. & Call, J. (2006b) How great apes perform on a modified trap-tube task. Animal Cognition 9(3):193–99.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Murphy, G. L. & Medin, D. L. (1985) The role of theories in conceptual coherence. Psychological Review 92:289316.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Namy, L. L. & Gentner, D. (2002) Making a silk purse out of two sow's ears: Young children's use of comparison in category learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology 131:515.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Newell, A. (1980) Physical symbol systems. Cognitive Science 4:135–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newell, A. (1990) Unified theories of cognition Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Newell, A. & Simon, H. A. (1976) Computer science as empirical inquiry: Symbols and search. Communications of the ACM 19:113–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Niklasson, L. & van Gelder, T. (1994) On being systematically connectionist. Mind and Language 9(3):288302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oden, D. L., Thompson, R. K. R. & Premack, D. (2001) Can an ape reason analogically? Comprehension and production of analogical problems by Sarah, a chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes). In: The analogical mind, ed. Gentner, D., Holyoak, K. J. & Kokinov, B. N., pp. 471–98. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Paz, Y. M. C. G., Bond, A. B., Kamil, A. C. & Balda, R. P. (2004) Pinyon jays use transitive inference to predict social dominance. Nature 430(7001):778–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Penn, D. C. & Povinelli, D. J. (2007a) Causal cognition in human and nonhuman animals: A comparative, critical review. Annual Review of Psychology 58:97118.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Penn, D. C. & Povinelli, D. J. (2007b) On the lack of evidence that non-human animals possess anything remotely resembling a “theory of mind.” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 362:731–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pepperberg, I. M. (1987) Acquisition of the same/different concept by an African grey parrot (Psittacus erithacus): Learning with respect to categories of color, shape and material. Animal Learning and Behavior 15:423–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pepperberg, I. M. (2002) The Alex studies: Cognitive and communicative abilities of grey parrots Harvard University Press.Google ScholarPubMed
Pepperberg, I. M. (2005) Intelligence and rationality in parrots. In: Rational animals?, ed. Hurley, S. & Nudds, M.. pp. 469–88. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Perruchet, P. & Pacton, S. (2006) Implicit learning and statistical learning: One phenomenon, two approaches. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 10(5):233–38.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Peterson, C. C. & Siegal, M. (2000) Insights into theory of mind from deafness and autism. Mind and Language 15(1):123–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Piaget, J. (1928) Judgment and reasoning in the child Kegan, Paul, Trench and Trubner.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Piaget, J. (1955) The child's construction of reality Routledge.Google Scholar
Pinker, S. (1994) The language instinct, 1st edition. W. Morrow.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pinker, S. (2005) So how does the mind work? Mind and Language 20(1):124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pinker, S. & Bloom, P. (1990) Natural language and natural selection. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 13(4):707–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pinker, S. & Jackendoff, R. (2005) The faculty of language: What's special about it? Cognition 95:201–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pinker, S. & Prince, A. (1988) On language and connectionism: Analysis of a parallel distributed processing model of language acquisition. Cognition 28:73193.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Plate, T. (1991) Holographic reduced representations: Convolution algebra for compositional distributed representations. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, ed. Mylopoulos, J. & Reiter, R., pp. 3035. Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
Plate, T. (2000) Analogy retrieval and processing with distributed vector representations. Expert Systems: The International Journal of Knowledge Engineering and Neural Networks 17(1):2940.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pollack, J. B. (1990) Recursive distributed representations. Artificial Intelligence 46 (1–2):77106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Povinelli, D. J. (2000) Folk physics for apes: The chimpanzee's theory of how the world works Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Povinelli, D. J. (2004) Behind the apes' appearance: Escaping anthropomorphism in the study of other minds. Daedalus: Journal of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences Winter:2941.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Povinelli, D. J., Bering, J. M. & Giambrone, S. (2000) Toward a science of other minds: Escaping the argument by analogy. Cognitive Science 24(3):509–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Povinelli, D. J. & Dunphy-Lelii, S. (2001) Do chimpanzees seek explanations? Preliminary comparative investigations. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology 55(2):187–95.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Povinelli, D. J. & Giambrone, S. (2001) Reasoning about beliefs: A human specialization? Child Development 72(3):691–95.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Povinelli, D. J. & Preuss, T. M. (1995) Theory of mind: Evolutionary history of a cognitive specialization. Trends in Neurosciences 18(9):418–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Povinelli, D. J. & Vonk, J. (2003) Chimpanzee minds: Suspiciously human? Trends in Cognitive Sciences 7(4):157–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Povinelli, D. J. & Vonk, J. (2004) We don't need a microscope to explore the chimpanzee's mind. Mind and Language 19(1):128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Premack, D. (1983a) Animal cognition. Annual Review of Psychology 34:351–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Premack, D. (1983b) The codes of man and beast. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 6:125–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Premack, D. (1988) Minds with and without language. In: Thought without language, ed. Weiskrantz, L., pp. 4665. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Premack, D. (2007) Human and animal cognition: Continuity and discontinuity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 104:13861–67.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Premack, D. & Woodruff, G. (1978) Does the chimpanzee have a theory of mind? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 4:515–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Preston, S. D. & de Waal, F. B. M. (2002) Empathy: Its ultimate and proximate bases. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25:172.Google ScholarPubMed
Preuss, T. M. (2004) What is it like to be a human? In: The cognitive neurosciences, 3rd ed., ed. Gazzaniga, M.. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Preuss, T. M. (2006) Who's afraid of Homo sapiens? Journal of Biomedical Discovery and Collaboration 1:17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Prinz, J. & Clark, A. (2004) Putting concepts to work: Some thoughts for the 21st century. Mind and Language 19(1):5769.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rattermann, M. J. & Gentner, D. (1998a) More evidence for a relational shift in the development of analogy: Children's performance on a causal-mapping task. Cognitive Development 13(4):453–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reber, A. S. (1967) Implicit learning of artificial grammars. Journal of Verbal Learning and Behavior 6:855–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Redington, M. & Chater, N. (1996) Transfer in artificial grammar learning: A reevaluation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 125(2):123–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rendell, L. & Whitehead, H. (2001) Culture in whales and dolphins. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24:309–82.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Richland, L. E., Morrison, R. G. & Holyoak, K. J (2006) Children's development of analogical reasoning: Insights from scene analogy problems. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 94(3):249–73.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Robin, N. & Holyoak, K. J. (1995) Relational complexity and the functions of the prefrontal cortex. In: The cognitive neurosciences, ed. Gazzaniga, M., pp. 987–97. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Rumelhart, D. E. & McClelland, J. L. (1986) Parallel distributed processing: Explorations in the microstructure of cognition MIT Press.Google Scholar
Sandler, W., Meir, I., Padden, C. & Aronoff, M. (2005) From the cover: The emergence of grammar: Systematic structure in a new language. Proceedings of the National Academy of the Sciences USA 102:2661–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Santos, L. R., Nissen, A. G. & Ferrugia, J. A. (2006) Rhesus monkeys, Macaca mulatta, know what others can and cannot hear. Animal Behaviour 71(5):1175–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Savage-Rumbaugh, S. & Lewin, R. (1994) Kanzi: The ape at the brink of the human mind Wiley.Google Scholar
Savage-Rumbaugh, S., Shanker, S. G. & Taylor, T. J. (1998) Apes, language, and the human mind Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Saxe, R. (2006) Uniquely human social cognition. Current Opinion in Neurobiology 16(2):235–39.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Saxe, R., Tenenbaum, J. B. & Carey, S. (2005) Secret agents: Inferences about hidden causes by 10- and 12-month-old infants. Psychological Science 16(12):9951001.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schusterman, R. J. & Krieger, K. (1986) Artificial language comprehension and size transportation by a California sea lion (Zalopbas californianas). Journal of Comparative Psychology 100:348–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seed, A. M., Tebbich, S., Emery, N. J. & Clayton, N. S. (2006) Investigating physical cognition in rooks (Corvus frugilegus). Current Biology 16:697701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seidenberg, M. S. & Elman, J. L. (1999) Do infants learn grammar with algebra or statistics? Science 284:434–35.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Senghas, A., Kita, S. & Ozyurek, A. (2004) Children creating core properties of language: Evidence from an emerging sign language in Nicaragua. Science 305:1779–82.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Seyfarth, R. M., Cheney, D. L. & Bergman, T. J. (2005) Primate social cognition and the origins of language. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 9(6):264–66.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shannon, C. E. & Weaver, W. (1949) The mathematical theory of communication University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Shastri, L. & Ajjanagadde, V. (1993) From simple associations to systematic reasoning: A connectionist representation of rules, variables, and dynamic bindings using temporal synchrony. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16:417–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siegal, M., Varley, R. & Want, S. C. (2001) Mind over grammar: Reasoning in aphasia and development. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 5(7):296301.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Silk, J. B. (1999) Male bonnet macaques use information about third-party rank relationships to recruit allies. Animal Behaviour 58:4551.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Silk, J. B. (2002a) Kin selection in primate groups. International Journal of Primatology 23(4):849–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, J. D., Shields, W. E. & Washburn, D. A. (2003) The comparative psychology of uncertainty monitoring and metacognition. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26:317–73.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smolensky, P. (1990) Tensor product variable binding and the representation of symbolic structures in connectionist systems. Artificial Intelligence 46:159216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smolensky, P. (1999) Grammar-based connectionist approaches to language. Cognitive Science 23(4):589613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strawson, P. F. (1959) Individuals Methuen.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suddendorf, T. & Corballis, M. C. (2007a) The evolution of foresight: What is mental time travel and is it unique to humans? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 30(3):299313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tebbich, S., Seed, A. M., Emery, N. J. & Clayton, N. S. (2007) Non-tool-using rooks (Corvus frigilegus) solve the trap-tube task. Animal Cognition 10(2):225–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tenenbaum, J. B., Griffiths, T. L. & Niyogi, S. (2007) Intuitive theories as grammars for causal inference. In: Causal learning: Psychology, philosophy, and computation, ed. Gopnik, A. & Schulz, L.. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Terrace, H. S. (2005a) Metacognition and the evolution of language. In: The missing link in cognition: Origins of self-reflective consciousness, ed. Terrace, H. S. & Metcalfe, J.. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, R. K. R. & Oden, D. L. (2000) Categorical perception and conceptual judgments by nonhuman primates: The paleological monkey and the analogical ape. Cognitive Science 24:363–96. (Special issue on Primate Cognition; guest editor, M. Tomasello.)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, R. K. R., Oden, D. L. & Boysen, S. T. (1997) Language-naive chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) judge relations between relations in a conceptual matching-to-sample task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes 23(1):3143.Google Scholar
Tomasello, M. (2000) Do young children have adult syntactic competence? Cognition 74(3):209–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tomasello, M. & Call, J. (1997) Primate cognition Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tomasello, M., Call, J. & Hare, B. (2003a) Chimpanzees understand psychological states – The question is which ones and to what extent. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 7(4):153–56.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tomasello, M., Call, J. & Hare, B. (2003b) Chimpanzees versus humans: It's not that simple. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 7(6):239–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tomasello, M., Carpenter, M., Call, J., Behne, T. & Moll, H. (2005) Understanding and sharing intentions: The origins of cultural cognition. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28:675–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tomasello, M. & Rakoczy, H. (2003) What makes human cognition unique? From individual to shared to collective intentionality. Mind and Language 18(2):121–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tunney, R. J. & Altmann, G. T. (1999) The transfer effect in artificial grammar learning: Reappraising the evidence on the transfer of sequential dependencies. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition 25:1322–33.Google Scholar
Tunney, R. J. & Altmann, G. T. (2001) Two modes of transfer in artificial grammar learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition 27(3):614–39.Google ScholarPubMed
van Gelder, T. (1990) Compositionality: A connectionist variation on a classical theme. Cognitive Science 14:355–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Gelder, T. (1995) What might cognition be, if not computation? The Journal of Philosophy 92(7):345–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Gelder, T. (1998) The dynamical hypothesis in cognitive science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21(5):615–28.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Varley, R. A., Klessinger, N. J., Romanowski, C. A. & Siegal, M. (2005) Agrammatic but numerate. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 102(9):3519–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Varley, R. A. & Siegal, M. (2000) Evidence for cognition without grammar from causal reasoning and “theory of mind” in an agrammatic aphasic patient. Current Biology 10(12):723–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Varley, R. A., Siegal, M. & Want, S. C. (2001) Severe impairment in grammar does not preclude theory of mind. Neurocase 7(6):489–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Visalberghi, E. & Limongelli, L. (1994) Lack of comprehension of cause-effect relations in tool-using capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella). Journal of Comparative Psychology 108:1522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Visalberghi, E. & Limongelli, L. (1996) Action and understanding: Tool use revisited through the mind of capuchin monkeys. In: Reaching into thought. The minds of the great apes, ed. Russon, A. E., Bard, K. A. & Parker, S. T., pp. 5779. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Visalberghi, E. & Tomasello, M. (1998) Primate causal understanding in the physical and psychological domains. Behavioural Processes 42 (2–3):189203.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vonk, J. (2003) Gorilla (Gorilla gorilla gorilla) and orangutan (Pongo abelii) understanding of first and second order relations. Animal Cognition 6:7786.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vonk, J. & Povinelli, D. J. (2006) Similarity and difference in the conceptual systems of primates: The unobservability hypothesis. In: Comparative cognition: Experimental explorations of animal intelligence, ed. Zentall, T. & Wasserman, E. A., pp. 363–87. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Waldmann, M. R. & Holyoak, K. J. (1992) Predictive and diagnostic learning within causal models: Asymmetries in cue competition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 121:222–36.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Waltz, J. A., Knowlton, B. J., Holyoak, K. J., Boone, K. B., Back-Madruga, C., McPherson, S., Masterman, D., Chow, T., Cummings, J. L. & Miller, B. L. (2004) Relational integration and executive function in Alzheimer's disease. Neuropsychology 18(2):296305.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Waltz, J. A., Knowlton, B. J., Holyoak, K. J., Boone, K. B., Mishkin, F. S., Santos, M. de M., Thomas, C. R. & Miller, B. L. (1999) A system for relational reasoning in human prefrontal cortex. Psychological Science 10(2):119–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wasserman, E. A. & Castro, L. (2005) Surprise and change: Variations in the strength of present and absent cues in causal learning. Learning and Behavior 33(2):131–46.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wasserman, E. A., Young, M. E. & Cook, R. G. (2004) Variability discrimination in humans and animals: Implications for adaptive action. American Psychologist 59(9):879–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wasserman, E. A., Young, M. E. & Fagot, J. (2001) Effects of number of items on the baboon's discrimination of same from different visual displays. Animal Cognition 4:163–70.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weir, A. A. S. & Kacelnik, A. (2007) A New Caledonian crow (Corvus moneduloides) creatively re-designs tools by bending or unbending aluminium strips. Animal Cognition 9(4):317–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Westergaard, G. C. & Suomi, S. J. (1994) Hierarchical complexity of combinatorial manipulation in capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella). American Journal of Primatology 32(3):171–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whiten, A. (1996) When does behaviour-reading become mind-reading. In: Theories of theory of mind, ed. Carruthers, P. & Smith, P. K.. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Whiten, A. (2000) Chimpanzees and mental re-representation. In: Metarepresentations: A multidisciplinary perspective, ed. Sperber, D.. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wilson, W. H., Halford, G. S., Gray, B. & Phillips, S. (2001a) The STAR-2 model for mapping hierarchically structured analogs. In: The analogical mind, ed. Gentner, D., Holyoak, K. J. & Kokinov, B. N., pp. 125–60. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Wright, B. C. (2001) Reconceptualizing the transitive inference ability: A framework for existing and future research. Developmental Review 21(4):375422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wynne, C. D. L. (1995) Reinforcement accounts for transitive inference performance. Animal Learning and Behavior 23(2):207–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, M. E. & Wasserman, E. A. (1997) Entropy detection by pigeons: Response to mixed visual displays after same-different discrimination training. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes 23:157–70.Google ScholarPubMed
Young, M. E. & Wasserman, E. A. (2001) Entropy and variability discrimination. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition 27:278–93.Google ScholarPubMed
518
Cited by