Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T14:34:11.589Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Metacognition is prior

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 April 2009

Justin J. Couchman ,
Mariana V. C. Coutinho ,
Michael J. Beran  and
J. David Smith
Justin J. Couchman
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University at Buffalo, The State University of New York, Buffalo, NY [email protected]@[email protected]
Mariana V. C. Coutinho
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University at Buffalo, The State University of New York, Buffalo, NY [email protected]@[email protected]
Michael J. Beran
Affiliation:
Language Research Center, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA [email protected]
J. David Smith
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University at Buffalo, The State University of New York, Buffalo, NY [email protected]@[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We agree with Carruthers that evidence for metacognition in species lacking mindreading provides dramatic evidence in favor of the metacognition-is-prior account and against the mindreading-is-prior account. We discuss this existing evidence and explain why an evolutionary perspective favors the former account and poses serious problems for the latter account.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 32 , Issue 2 , April 2009 , pp. 142
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

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

Beran, M. J., Smith, J. D., Coutinho, M. V. C., Couchman, J. J. & Boomer, J. G. (in press) The psychological organization of “uncertainty” responses and “middle” responses: A dissociation in capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes.Google Scholar
Carruthers, P. (2008b) Metacognition in animals: A skeptical look. Mind and Language 23(1):58–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Couchman, J. J., Coutinho, M. V. C., Beran, M. J. & Smith, J. D. (submitted) Beyond stimulus cues and reinforcement signals: A new approach to animal metacognition.Google Scholar
Dewey, J. (1934/1980) Art as experience. Perigee Books. (Original work published in 1934.)Google Scholar
Heyes, C. M. (1998) Theory of mind in nonhuman primates. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21(1):101–34.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Inman, A. & Shettleworth, S. J. (1999) Detecting metamemory in non-verbal subjects: A test with pigeons. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes 25:389–95.Google Scholar
James, W. (1890/1952) The principles of psychology. In series: Great Books of the Western World, vol. 53, ed. Hutchins, R. M.. University of Chicago Press. (Original work published in 1890).Google Scholar
Nagel, T. (1974) What is it like to be a bat? Philosophical Review 83:435–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, J. D., Beran, M. J., Couchman, J. J. & Coutinho, M. V. C. (2008) The comparative study of metacognition: Sharper paradigms, safer inferences. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 15(4):679–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smith, J. D., Beran, M. J., Redford, J. S. & Washburn, D. A. (2006) Dissociating uncertainty responses and reinforcement signals in the comparative study of uncertainty monitoring. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 135(2):282–97.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smith, J. D., Shields, W. & Washburn, D. (2003) The comparative psychology of uncertainty monitoring and metacognition. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26:317–39; discussion pp. 339–73.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tolman, E. C. (1938) The determiners of behavior at a choice point. Psychological Review 45:1–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar