Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Animal Minds > Social Cognition > Flashcards

Social Cognition Flashcards

1
Q

What is social cognition

A

the study of cognitive processes involved in social interactions between animals

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What three contexts is social cognition relevant in

A

Communication (e.g. alarm calls & other vocalizations, gestures, etc, that provide others with information about oneself or the environment)

Predicting or manipulating others’ behavior (e.g. cooperation, alliance formation, conflict avoidance, deception & counter-deception)

Self-knowledge (e.g. self-recognition, self-awareness)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Describe the Hamadryas Baboons’ sneaky grooming session

A

Female is grooming a subordinate male behind a rock. Nearby dominant make believes there is nothing behind the rock

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

What are two potential thought processes of the female in the Hamadryas Baboons’ sneaky grooming session and what do these demonstrate

A

“The dominant can’t see the subordinate, so he doesn’t know I’m grooming him.” (reasoning about mental states)

OR

“Previously when there was a rock between the dominant and subordinate, I could groom the subordinate safely.” (Associative learning)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

What are the four aspects of Daniel Dennett;s Orders of Inentionality?

A

Zero-order
First-order
Second-order
Third-order

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What is the Zero-order of Daniel Dennett’s Orders of Intentionality?

A

individual does not have intentions (behavior is reflexive)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Give an example of the Zero-order of Daniel Dennett’s Orders of Intentionality?

A

eye-blink in response to puff of air

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

What is the First-order of Daniel Dennett’s Orders of Intentionality?

A

Individuals have mental states such as beliefs, desires, intentions

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Give an example of the First-order of Daniel Dennett’s Orders of Intentionality?

A

“I want X”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

What is the Second-order of Daniel Dennett’s Orders of Intentionality?

A

Ability to reason about others’ mental states

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Give an example of the Second-order of Daniel Dennett’s Orders of Intentionality?

A

“I know that you want X”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

What is the Third-order of Daniel Dennett’s Orders of Intentionality?

A

Ability to reason about others’ reasoning about your (or others’) mental states

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Give an example of the Third-order of Daniel Dennett’s Orders of Intentionality?

A

“I know that you know that I want X”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

What theory do second-order and third-order of intentionality contribute to

A

Theory of Mind (Premack and Woodruff, 1978)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Describe Deception by Nesting Plovers in terms of Zero, First, and Second Order intentionalities

A

Zero-order: the behavior is automatically triggered by the predator

First-order: the plover intends to lead the predator away

Second-order: the plover intends the predator to believe that she is injured

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Describe the results of field experiments performed by Ristau on Nesting Plovers

A

In 87% of human approaches, plover moved so as to lead the intruder away from the nest à plovers are responsive

Dangerous intruders caused more arousal than non-threatening ones à plovers are discriminating

Plovers intensified their displays or re-approached intruder if the intruder stopped following à plovers are flexible

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Is the evidence sufficient to argue that plovers have theory of mind?

A

Would imply that any non-intentional system must be rigid and inflexible (not necessarily true)

Maybe plovers have an innate anti-predator response, made more flexible by learning à in that case, no ToM required

We shouldn’t assume Theory of Mind where simpler explanations are possible.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

What are the three types of deception

A

Functional deception
Tactical deception
Intentional deception

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

What are examples of functional deception

A

Camouflage, mimicry, dishonest advertising, reflex responses

20
Q

Describe tactical deception

A

“acts from the normal repertoire of the agent, deployed such that another individual is likely to misinterpret what the acts signify, to the advantage of the agent”

not necessarily second-order intentional, since could be associative learning

21
Q

Describe intentional deception

A

Deceptive acts performed with intent to deceive by altering the target’s mental state

22
Q

Describe the study of intentional deception in mangabeys

A

The case of Boss and Rapide:

Experimenter hides food in one of several boxes in monkeys’ enclosure

Rapide is allowed to observe the baiting process; Boss is not

Trial 1: Rapide goes straight to food; Boss follows; Boss steals food from Rapide

After Trial 1: Rapide sets off in direction away from baited box, then doubles back to retrieve food while Boss is busy searching other boxes

23
Q

What are the two possible explanations for the case of Boss and Rapide

A

Does Rapide know that Boss doesn’t know where the food is? Does Rapide know he can trick Boss into believing the food is somewhere other than its true location?

OR, more simply: Is Rapide just learning not to go straight to the food? (because he is getting rewarded for this -> associative learning)

24
Q

What question does the case of Boss and Rapide and the Sneaky-grooming Baboons bring up

A

Do they really demonstrate that those subjects are able to intentionally manipulate the mental states of others? Or does it only appear that way? How can we tell?

25
Q

What are the four drawbacks of the anecdotes of the case of Boss and Rapide and the Sneaky-grooming Baboons

A
  • Behavior could occur by chance
  • Behavior could be due to previous learning
  • Report could reflect bias or poor observation by researcher
  • Many reports accumulated, but these were reported by different observers and involved different individuals
26
Q

What is the purpose of False Belief Tests

A

Test development of Theory of Mind in human children

27
Q

Describe an example of a False Belief Test

A

Child and clown puppet watch as experimenter hides a toy in one of two boxes

Clown puppet leaves; child watches as experimenter moves the toy to the other box

Clown puppet returns; child is asked “Where will the clown look for the toy?”

28
Q

What does passing the False Belief Test Require

A

taking into account the clown’s lack of knowledge about the box switch (seeing is knowing; not seeing is not knowing), and predicting that the clown will act on the basis of his own knowledge/belief (knowing predicts action)

29
Q

At what age do children pass the False Belief Test

A

After the age of 3-4

30
Q

What happens when children are given the False Belief test before the age of 3-4

A

they cannot separate their own representation of the situation from that of another individual

31
Q

Describe the Seeing Is Knowing study in Chimpanzees? (First Condition)

A

Chimpanzees watch as the following sequence unfolds (acted out by human experimenters):

One experimenter (the “Guesser”) leaves the room

The other experimenter (the “Knower”) hides food in one of four containers (chimpanzee can’t see which one)

The Guesser returns, and both Knower and Guesser each point to one of the four containers

Then, chimpanzee subjects are allowed to choose one of the four containers

32
Q

What were the results of the Seeing Is Knowing study in Chimpanzees? (First Condition)

A

Chimpanzees appear to choose the Knower over the Guesser BUT… Performance improved over blocks of trials. Maybe the chimpanzees gradually learnt a simple rule: select the person who stayed in the room…?

33
Q

What was the second condition of the Seeing Is Knowing study in Chimpanzees?

A

Guesser does not leave the room, but places a paper bag over his head during the baiting procedure

34
Q

What were the results of the Seeing Is Knowing study in Chimpanzees? (Second condition)

A

Chimpanzees still correctly choose the box indicated by the Knower BUT… Performance on first two trials was random. Maybe the chimpanzees learnt a simple rule again: select the person who didn’t have a bag on his head…?

35
Q

Describe the Competitive Feeding Paradigm study

A

Hare et al. (2000) designed a more naturalistic approach, exploiting chimpanzees’ tendency to compete with each other over food.

To succeed at getting food, the subordinate chimpanzee has to predict which of the two pieces the dominant will go for first

Two pieces of food were placed in a central room, with a dominant and a subordinate chimpanzee in separate rooms on either side.

The pieces of food were either visible to both individuals, or behind one or two occluders such that one/both was only visible to the subordinate

36
Q

What were the results of the Competitive Feeding Paradigm study

A

Subordinates got more food in the conditions where some/all food was only visible to them (Hidden-Visible and HiddenHidden conditions)

Subordinates approached hidden food first on 73% of trials

BUT… are the subordinates reacting to what they think the dominant knows, or are they more simply reacting to the dominant as a stimulus (and the dominant itself reacts differently to food it can and cannot see)?

37
Q

Describe the study that tested if Chimpanzees track who knows what

A

Hare et al. 2001 updated the competitive feeding paradigm, comparing four conditions: - Informed (dominant witnessed baiting)
- Uninformed (dominant did not witness baiting)
- Misinformed (food was secretly moved after baiting)
- Switched (dominant was exchanged for another individual after baiting)

38
Q

Describe the results of the study that tested if Chimpanzees track who knows what

A

Subordinates were LESS inhibited to approach food when dominant was uninformed/misinformed than when it was informed

Subordinates obtained more food when the dominant was switched than when it remained the same

39
Q

Describe the study of alarm calling in wild chimpanzees

A

Researchers placed model vipers in the paths of travelling wild chimpanzees

At the time a focal subject approached the viper, other group members sometimes had their view of the snake obscured by vegetation (and sometimes not)

40
Q

What do Chimpanzees usually do when they see a viper?

A

the study of alarm calling in wild chimpanzees

41
Q

What were the predicted results of the study of alarm calling in wild chimpanzees

A

chimpanzees produce fewer ‘alert hoos’ when all potential receivers have already seen the viper than when at least one receiver is unaware, if they take the receivers’ knowledge state into account (and if they appreciate that seeing is knowing)

42
Q

What were the actual results of the study of alarm calling in wild chimpanzees

A

Seen = subject had seen all receivers see the snake

Heard = subject had heard receivers alarm call, but could not have seen them see the snake

Ignorant = subject had not seen receivers see the snake and had not heard them alarm call

43
Q

What is common among Scrub Jays, Ravens, and other corvids?

A
  • cache food for future consumption, and can remember what, when and where they cached
  • cache food for future consumption, and can remember what, when and where they cached
44
Q

What are the actions of Scrub Jays, Ravens, and other corvids indicative of

A

they have counter strategies against having their own caches pilfered by others (they later re-cache food that they hid in the presence of conspecifics)

45
Q

Describe a study investigating whether ravens remember who observed them catching food?

A

Subjects cached food in an aviary while two other birds were held in separate cages to the side

One bird could observe the subject caching, the other one could not

One bird could observe the subject caching, the other one could not -> One bird could observe the subject caching, the other one could not

46
Q

What were the results of the ravens catching study?

A

Ravens retrieved more of their caches when in presence of observer (i.e. potential pilferer) than when alone or with non-observer

BUT Maybe observers give out subtle behavioral cues that they are about to pilfer?
-> Maybe observers give out subtle behavioral cues that they are about to pilfer?

Animal Minds (17 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions