Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Animal Cognition
- The Cambridge Handbook of Animal Cognition
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures, Tables, and Boxes
- Contributors
- Acknowledgments
- Introduction
- Part I Communication and Language
- 1 Animal Communication Overview
- 2 Communication in Ant Societies
- 3 Symbolic Communication in the Grey Parrot
- 4 Communication in Dogs and Wolves
- 5 Semantic Communication in Primates
- Part II Memory and Recall
- Part III Social Cognition
- Part IV Social Learning and Teaching
- Part V Numerical and Quantitative Abilities
- Part VI Innovation and Problem-Solving
- Index
- References
3 - Symbolic Communication in the Grey Parrot
from Part I - Communication and Language
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 July 2021
Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Animal Cognition
- The Cambridge Handbook of Animal Cognition
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures, Tables, and Boxes
- Contributors
- Acknowledgments
- Introduction
- Part I Communication and Language
- 1 Animal Communication Overview
- 2 Communication in Ant Societies
- 3 Symbolic Communication in the Grey Parrot
- 4 Communication in Dogs and Wolves
- 5 Semantic Communication in Primates
- Part II Memory and Recall
- Part III Social Cognition
- Part IV Social Learning and Teaching
- Part V Numerical and Quantitative Abilities
- Part VI Innovation and Problem-Solving
- Index
- References
Summary
Decades ago, Premack (1978) hypothesized that nonhuman subjects that could acquire symbolic representation and communication would process information differently from those that could not. He argued that such processing would enable such subjects to perform more complicated cognitive tasks than those without such processing, and at levels comparable to those of young children, if not adult humans. Finally, he claimed that such acquisition and processing would likely be limited to nonhuman primates. Studies over the past 40 years, involving Grey parrots (Psittacus erithacus), have shown that Premack’s basic premise concerning the effects of symbolic representation was correct, but that the acquisition and use of symbolic representation to solve complex problems goes well beyond the primate line. I document how acquisition of symbolic representation and communication has enabled these parrots to perform at levels beyond those of some nonhuman primates and at levels equivalent to four-to- seven-year-old children.
Keywords
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Cambridge Handbook of Animal Cognition , pp. 56 - 73Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2021
References
Chakraborty, M., Walløe, S., Nedergaard, S., Fridel, E. E., Dabelsteen, T., Pakkenberg, B., et al. (2015). Core and shell song systems unique to the parrot brain. PLoS One, 10(6), e0118496. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0118496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clements, K., Gray, S. L., Gross, B., & Pepperberg, I. M. (2018). Initial evidence for probabilistic learning by a Grey parrot (Psittacus erithacus). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 132, 166–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Denison, S., Bonawitz, E., Gopnik, A., & Griffiths, T. L. (2013). Rational variability in children’s causal inferences: The Sampling Hypothesis. Cognition, 126, 285–300.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Denison, S. & Xu, F. (2014). The origins of probabilistic inference in human infants. Cognition, 130, 335–347.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Driver, R. (1978) When is a stage not a stage? A critique of Piaget’s theory of cognitive development and its application to science education. Educational Research, 21, 54–61,Google Scholar
Eckert, J., Rakoczy, H., & Call, J. (2017). Are great apes able to reason from multi-item samples to populations of food items? American Journal of Primatology, 79(10). https://doi.org/10.1002/ ajp.22693Google Scholar
Eckert, J., Call, J., Hermes, J., Herman, E., & Rakoczy, H. (2018a). Intuitive statistical inferences in chimpanzees and humans follow Weber’s law. Cognition, 180, 99–107.Google Scholar
Eckert, J., Rakoczy, H., Call, J., Hermann, E., & Hanus, D. (2018b). Chimpanzees consider humans’ psychological states when drawing statistical inferences. Current Biology, 28, 1959–1963.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gardner, R. A. & Gardner, B. T. (1969). Teaching sign language to a chimpanzee. Science, 187, 644–672.Google Scholar
Griffin, D. (1976). The Question of Animal Awareness. New York: Rockefeller University Press.Google Scholar
Gutiérrez-Ibáñez, C., Iwaniuk, A. N., & Wylie, D. R. (2018). Parrots have evolved a primate-like telencephalic-midbrain-cerebellar circuit. Scientific Reports, 8, 9960. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-28301-4.Google Scholar
Hedges, S. B., Parker, P. H., Sibley, C. G., & Kumar, S. (1996). Continental breakup and the ordinal diversification of birds and mammals. Nature, 381, 226–229.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hsee, C. K. (1998). Less is better: When low-value options are valued more highly than high-value options. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 11, 107–121.3.0.CO;2-Y>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jarvis, E. D., Yu, J., Rivas, M. V., Horita, H., Feenders, G. et al. (2013). Global view of the functional molecular organization of the avian cerebrum: Mirror images and functional columns. Journal of Comparative Neurology, 521, 3614–3665.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kanizsa, G. (1955/1987). Margini quasi-percettivi in campi con stimulazione omogenea. Rivista di Psicologia, 49, 7–30 [translated in Petry, S. & Meyer, G. (Eds.), 1987. The Perception of Illusory Contours. New York: Springer].Google Scholar
Kanizsa, G. (1979). Organization in Vision: Essays on Gestalt Perception. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger Publishers.Google Scholar
Karmiloff-Smith, A. (1992). Beyond Modularity: A Developmental Perspective on Cognitive Science. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press/Bradford Books.Google Scholar
Mazengenya, P., Bhagwandin, A., Manger, P. R., & Ihunwo, A. O. (2018). Putative adult neurogenesis in Old World parrots: The Congo African Grey parrot (Psittacus erithacus) and the timneh Grey parrot (Psittacus timneh). Frontiers in Neuroanatomy, 12,7, doi: 10.3389/fnana.2018.00007.Google Scholar
Miles, H. L. (1978). Language Acquisition in Apes and Children. In Peng, F. C. C. (Ed.), Sign Language and Language Acquisition in Man and Ape (pp. 108–120). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Minini, L. & Jeffery, K. J. (2006). Do rats use shape to solve “shape discriminations”? Learning & Memory, 13, 287–297.Google Scholar
Morgane, P. J., Jacobs, M. S., & Galaburda, A. (1986). Evolutionary Morphology of the Dolphin Brain. In Schusterman, R. J., Thomas, J. A., & Wood, F. G. (Eds.), Dolphin Cognition and Behavior: A Comparative Approach (pp. 5–29). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Müller, J. & Reisz, R. R. (2005). Four well-constrained calibrations from the vertebrate fossil record for molecular clock estimates. BioEssays, 27, 1069–1075.Google Scholar
Nagasaka, Y., Brooks, D. I., & Wasserman, E. A. (2010). Amodal completion in bonobos. Learning & Motivation, 41, 174–186.Google Scholar
Olkowicz, S., Kocourek, M., Lŭcan, R. K., Porteš, M., Fitch, W. T., Herculano- Houzel, S., et al. (2016). Birds have primate-like numbers of neurons in the forebrain. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, U.S.A., 113, 7255–7260.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pattison, K. F. & Zentall, T. R. (2014). Suboptimal choice by dogs: When less is better than more. Animal Cognition, 17, 1019–1022.Google Scholar
Pepperberg, I. M. (1981). Functional vocalizations by an African Grey parrot (Psittacus erithacus). Zeitschrift für Tierpsychologie, 55, 139–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pepperberg, I. M. (2006a). Grey parrot (Psittacus erithacus) numerical abilities: Addition and further experiments on a zero-like concept. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 120, 1–11.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pepperberg, I. M. (2006b). Ordinality and inferential abilities of a Grey parrot (Psittacus erithacus). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 120, 205–216.Google Scholar
Pepperberg, I. M. (2007). Grey parrots do not always “parrot”: Roles of imitation and phonological awareness in the creation of new labels from existing vocalizations. Language Sciences, 29, 1–13.Google Scholar
Pepperberg, I. M. (2009). Grey parrot vocal learning: Creation of new labels from existing vocalizations and issues of imitation. LACUS Forum, 34, 21–30.Google Scholar
Pepperberg, I. M. (2012). Symbolic Communication in the Grey Parrot. In Vonk, J. & Shackelford, T. (Eds.), Oxford Handbook of Comparative Evolutionary Psychology (pp. 772–834). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Pepperberg, I. M. (2017). Review of studies on visual perception in Grey parrots (Psittacus erithacus): The Müller-Lyer illusion, amodal and modal completion. Animal Behavior and Cognition, 4, 378–395.Google Scholar
Pepperberg, I. M. & Gordon, J. D. (2005). Number comprehension by a Grey parrot (Psittacus erithacus), including a zero-like concept. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 119, 197–209.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pepperberg, I. M., Vicinay, J., & Cavanagh, P. (2008). The Müller-Lyer illusion is processed by a Grey parrot (Psittacus erithacus). Perception, 37, 765–781.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pepperberg, I. M. & Carey, S. (2012). Grey parrot number acquisition: The inference of cardinal value from ordinal position on the numeral list. Cognition, 125, 219–232.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pepperberg, I. M. & Nakayama, K. (2016). Robust representation of shape in a Grey parrot (Psittacus erithacus). Cognition, 153, 146–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Piaget, J. & Inhelder, B. (1975). The Origin of the Idea of Chance in Children (Leake, L., Trans.). New York, NY: Norton.Google Scholar
Premack, D. (1978). On the Abstractness of Human Concepts: Why It Would Be Difficult to Talk to a Pigeon. In Hulse, S. H., Fowler, H. & Honig, W. K. (Eds.), Cognitive Processes in Animal Behavior (pp. 421–451). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Rakoczy, H., Clüver, A., Saucke, L., Stoffregen, N., Gräener, A., Migura, J., & Call, J. (2014). Apes are intuitive statisticians. Cognition, 131, 60–68.Google Scholar
Regolin, L. & Vallortigara, G. (1995). Perception of partly occluded objects in young chicks. Perception and Psychophysics, 57, 971–976.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Richards, D. G., Woltz, J. P., & Herman, L. M. (1984). Vocal mimicry of computer-generated sounds and labeling of objects by a bottle-nosed dolphin (Tursiops truncatus). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 98, 10–28.Google Scholar
Rubinstein, A. (2002). Irrational diversification in multiple decision problems. European Economic Review, 46, 1369–1378.Google Scholar
Rumbaugh, D. (Ed.). (1977). Language Learning by a Chimpanzee: The LANA Project. New York: Academic. Eds. Oakley, D. A. & Plotkin, H. C.. London: Methuen, 126–153.Google Scholar
Sarich, V. M. & Cronin, J. E. (1977). Generation length and rates of hominid evolution. Nature, 269, 354–355.Google Scholar
Shinskey, J. L. & Munakata, Y. (2005). Familiarity breeds searching: Infants reverse their novelty preferences when reaching for hidden objects. Psychological Science, 16, 596–600.Google Scholar
Tecwyn, E. C., Denison, S., Messer, E. J. E., & Buchsbaum, D. (2017). Intuitive probabilistic inference in capuchin monkeys. Animal Cognition, 20, 244–256.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Téglás, E., Vul, E., Girotto, V., Gonzalez, M., Tenenbaum, J. B., & Bonatti, L. L. (2011). Pure reasoning in 12-month-old infants as probabilistic inference. Science, 332, 1054–1059.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Téglás, E., Ibanez-Lillo, A., Costa, A., & Bonatti, L. L. (2015). Numerical representations and intuitions of probabilities at 12 months. Developmental Science, 18, 183–193.Google Scholar