Does absolute brain size really predict self-control? Hand-tracking training improves performance on the A-not-B task

S. A. Jelbert*, A. H. Taylor, R. D. Gray

*Corresponding author for this work

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    39 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    Large-scale, comparative cognition studies are set to revolutionize the way we investigate and understand the evolution of intelligence. However, the conclusions reached by such work have a key limitation: the cognitive tests themselves. If factors other than cognition can systematically affect the performance of a subset of animals on these tests, we risk drawing the wrong conclusions about how intelligence evolves. Here, we examined whether this is the case for the A-not-B task, recently used by MacLean and co-workers to study self-control among 36 different species. Non-primates performed poorly on this task; possibly because they have difficulty tracking the movements of a human demonstrator, and not because they lack self-control. To test this, we assessed the performance of New Caledonian crows on the A-not-B task before and after two types of training. New Caledonian crows trained to track rewards moved by a human demonstrator were more likely to pass theA-not-B test than birds trained on an unrelated choice task involving inhibitory control.Our findings demonstrate that overlooked task demands can affect performance on a cognitive task, and so bring into question MacLean's conclusion that absolute brain size best predicts self-control.

    Original languageEnglish
    JournalBiology Letters
    Volume12
    Issue number2
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 1 Feb 2016

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Does absolute brain size really predict self-control? Hand-tracking training improves performance on the A-not-B task'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this