Tomasello Michael, Call Josep
Max Planck Institute of Evolutionary Anthropology, Deutscher Platz 6, Leipzig, Germany.
J Comp Psychol. 2008 Nov;122(4):449-52. doi: 10.1037/0735-7036.122.4.449.
Boesch (2007) criticizes research comparing ape and human cognition on the basis of both internal and external validity. The authors show here that most of those criticisms are not valid because: (i) most threats to internal validity (e.g., conspecific experimenters for humans but not apes) are controlled for experimentally; (ii) externally, there is no empirical evidence that captive apes have fewer cognitive skills than wild apes and indeed some evidence (especially from human-raised apes) that they have more; and (iii) externally, there is no empirical evidence that Western middle-class children have different cognitive skills from other children at very early ages in basic cognitive domains. Although difficult, with appropriate methodological care, experimental cross-species comparisons may be validly made.
博施(2007年)基于内部效度和外部效度对比较猿类和人类认知的研究提出了批评。作者在此表明,这些批评大多是无效的,原因如下:(i)大多数对内部效度的威胁(例如,人类实验者为同种,但猿类不是)已通过实验得到控制;(ii)在外部,没有实证证据表明圈养猿类的认知技能比野生猿类少,实际上有一些证据(尤其是来自人类抚养的猿类)表明它们的认知技能更多;(iii)在外部,没有实证证据表明西方中产阶级儿童在基本认知领域的早期与其他儿童有不同的认知技能。尽管困难,但通过适当的方法谨慎操作,跨物种实验比较可能是有效的。