Taylor Alex, Roberts Reece, Hunt Gavin, Gray Russell
Department of Psychology; University of Auckland; Auckland, New Zealand.
Commun Integr Biol. 2009 Jul;2(4):311-2. doi: 10.4161/cib.2.4.8224.
A large number of studies have failed to find conclusive evidence for causal reasoning in nonhuman animals. For example, when animals are required to avoid a trap while extracting a reward from a tube they appear to learn about the surface-level features of the task, rather than about the task's causal regularities. We recently reported that New Caledonian crows solved a two-trap-tube task and then were able to immediately solve a novel, visually distinct problem, the trap-table task. Such transfer suggests these crows were reasoning causally. However, there are two other possible explanations for the successful transfer: sampling bias and the use of a spatial, rather than a causal, analogy. Here we present data that rule out these explanations.
大量研究未能找到非人类动物进行因果推理的确凿证据。例如,当要求动物在从管子中获取奖励时避开陷阱时,它们似乎只是了解了任务的表面特征,而非任务的因果规律。我们最近报告称,新喀里多尼亚乌鸦解决了一个双陷阱管任务,然后能够立即解决一个新颖的、视觉上不同的问题——陷阱桌任务。这种迁移表明这些乌鸦在进行因果推理。然而,对于这种成功的迁移还有另外两种可能的解释:抽样偏差以及使用空间类比而非因果类比。在此我们展示的数据排除了这些解释。