Department of Behavioural Neurobiology, Max-PlanckInstitute for Ornithology.
Can J Exp Psychol. 2020 Sep;74(3):160-169. doi: 10.1037/cep0000204.
The objectives in the field of comparative cognition are clear; efforts are devoted to revealing the selection pressures that shape the brains and cognitive abilities of different species and understanding cognitive processes in differently structured brains. However, our progress on reaching these objectives is slow, mostly because of several major practical challenges. In this review, we discuss 2 major shortcomings: (a) the poor systematics and low magnitude of the phylogenetic comparisons made, and (b) the weak comparability of the results caused by interfering species-specific confounding factors (perceptual, motivational, and morphological) alongside an insufficient level of standardisation of the methodologies. We propose a multiple-level comparative approach that emphasises the importance of achieving more direct comparisons within taxonomic groups at genus or family level as the first step before comparing between distantly related groups. We also encourage increasing interdisciplinary efforts to execute "team-science" approach in building a systematic and direct large-scale phylogenetic comparisons of bigger cognitive test batteries that produce reliable species-representative data. We finally revisit some existing suggestions that allow us to maximise standardisation while minimising species-specific confounding factors. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).
比较认知领域的目标很明确；努力揭示塑造不同物种大脑和认知能力的选择压力，并理解结构不同的大脑中的认知过程。然而，我们在实现这些目标方面进展缓慢，主要是因为存在几个重大的实际挑战。在这篇综述中，我们讨论了两个主要的缺点：（a）系统发育比较的不完善和规模小，以及（b）由于感知、动机和形态等物种特异性混杂因素的干扰以及方法标准化程度不足，导致结果的可比性差。我们提出了一种多层次的比较方法，强调在进行远缘群之间的比较之前，首先在属或科的分类群内实现更直接的比较的重要性。我们还鼓励增加跨学科的努力，通过执行“团队科学”方法，构建更大认知测试电池的系统和直接的大规模系统发育比较，从而产生可靠的物种代表性数据。最后，我们重新审视了一些现有的建议，这些建议使我们能够在最小化物种特异性混杂因素的同时最大化标准化。（PsycInfo 数据库记录（c）2020 APA，保留所有权利）。
