Animal Psychology Past Paper PDF

**What is the connection between the case of Clever Hans, the intelligent horse, and Lloyd Morgan's Canon?** The case of Clever Hans was an inferential method which is a bad approach to study animal behavior, and Lloyd Morgan's Canon highlights the importance of avoiding overly complex interpretati...

**What is the connection between the case of Clever Hans, the intelligent horse, and Lloyd Morgan's Canon?** The case of Clever Hans was an inferential method which is a bad approach to study animal behavior, and Lloyd Morgan's Canon highlights the importance of avoiding overly complex interpretations of animal behavior. Clever Hans, a horse believed to solve math problems, was later found by psychologist Oskar Pfungst to respond to subtle, unconscious human cues rather than genuine reasoning. He demonstrated that the horse\'s abilities were due to an artifact: it answered correctly only when others knew the answer, relying on unconscious cues like posture and nodding, not actual computation. This discovery demonstrated the need to critically evaluate behavior without assuming advanced cognitive abilities. Lloyd Morgan's Canon advises using the simplest explanation for animal behavior (instinct, conditioning, or trial and error), avoiding assumptions of higher reasoning unless supported by strong evidence. He wrote the book "***Introduction to Comparative Psychology***" (1894) he acknowledged that **animals can have complex cognitive processes** but raised **concerns** about the **methods used** to study them. Scientist should **avoid attributing human-like reasoning** or **emotions** to animals **without strong evidence**. This anecdote shows us that Lloyd Morgan was right in saying that we should not choose first the more complex answer. He talked about two principles: complexity and parsimony. Complexity means that the cognitive processes of an animal can be more intricate than we think and are not always straightforward and parsimony encourages simplicity and economic explanations. To sum up, this case can be connected to Morgan's canon because it is a reminder to psychologists and researchers in general to apply the canon and be cautious in assuming conclusions and in producing biased results. 2. **According to Tinbergen's 4 questions, describe for a given behavior (e.g., play Behavior in Cats) what each question would entail, and the kind of evidence needed to answer it.** **Niko Tinbergen** was a Dutch biologist and ethologist, best known for his pioneering work in the field of animal behavior. He introduced 4 questions to fully understand a behavior. The questions focus on how a behavior occurs, and why natural selection has favored this particular behavior. Determining how a behavior occurs actually involves two questions: **One**: what stimulus causes it? And **two**: what does the animal\'s body do in response to that stimulus? These are the causes that are closest to the specific behavior we\'re looking at, so they\'re called the **proximate** **causes**. Asking the more complex question of why natural selection has favored this behavior requires asking two more questions: **One**: what about this behavior helps this animal survive and/or reproduce? And **two**: what is the evolutionary history of this behavior? These, are bigger-picture questions, and they show us the **ultimate** **causes** of the behavior. Using *play behavior in cats* as an example: \- **Causation (Mechanism):** This question examines the internal stimuli and physiological mechanisms that trigger play behavior in cats, such as neural pathways, hormones, or environmental cues. Evidence could include observing the cat's physical state during play or manipulating environmental stimuli to see how play behavior is triggered. \- **Development (Ontogeny):** This question looks at how play behavior develops throughout a cat\'s life. For example, does play behavior decrease with age or change from kittenhood to adulthood? Evidence might come from long-term studies tracking changes in play behavior over the cat\'s lifetime. \- **Function (Adaptation):** Here, the focus is on how play behavior contributes to survival or reproduction. Does it help cats develop hunting skills or social bonds? Evidence would include observations showing a link between play behavior and improved survival traits like hunting proficiency. \- **Evolution (Phylogeny):** This question explores how play behavior evolved across species. How does play behavior in cats compare to that in other animals, and what might this suggest about its evolutionary origins? Evidence might involve comparative studies of play behavior in closely related species, such as other carnivores, to trace its evolutionary development **1. Causation (Mechanism):\ ** Play behavior in cats is triggered by both internal and external factors. Internally, it may be driven by the cat\'s need for physical activity, mental stimulation, and social interaction. Neurologically, play is associated with increased levels of dopamine, a neurotransmitter involved in pleasure and motivation. Externally, play is triggered by stimuli such as movement (e.g., a toy or another cat) that mimics hunting or social engagement. Evidence for this includes observing increased play during high energy states and noting the role of environmental stimuli like toys or prey simulations. **2. Development (Ontogeny):\ ** In kittens, play behavior is frequent and primarily focused on learning essential life skills like hunting and social interaction. As cats age, their play behavior often decreases, but some aspects, like pouncing or stalking, continue into adulthood as part of hunting practice. For example, domesticated adult cats may still engage in play behaviors when they encounter small moving objects, such as toys or even lights. Evidence includes longitudinal observations of cats at different life stages, noting how their play evolves in terms of frequency and complexity. **3. Function (Adaptation):\ ** The primary function of play behavior in cats is to develop skills necessary for survival, particularly hunting and physical coordination. Play allows kittens to practice hunting tactics in a low-risk environment, improving their chances of survival as adults. It also serves to strengthen social bonds with other cats. For example, kitten play often includes mock fighting and chasing, which mirrors adult hunting and territorial behaviors. Evidence includes observations that cats who engage more in play during kittenhood tend to exhibit better hunting skills later on. **4. Evolution (Phylogeny):\ ** Play behavior in cats likely evolved as an adaptive trait for sharpening their hunting skills and social interactions. This behavior is observed in many carnivores, suggesting that it may be a common evolutionary strategy for practice and learning. Comparing play across species, such as dogs or wild felines, can reveal that similar play behaviors appear in related species, supporting the idea that play evolved for these adaptive purposes. Evidence includes comparative studies of wild and domesticated cats, as well as other carnivores, to trace the evolutionary development of play behavior. 3. **Who are the three fathers of ethology, and why are they considered so?** The three fathers of ethology, Niko Tinbergen, Konrad Lorenz, and Karl von Frisch, are considered pioneers in the study of animal behavior, particularly focusing on instinctive and genetic behaviors. They shared the Nobel Prize in 1973 for their groundbreaking discoveries. - Niko Tinbergen introduced the concept of Fixed Action Patterns (FAPs- instinctive, highly stereotyped behaviors that occur in a predictable sequence and are triggered by specific environmental stimuli, performed the same way each time) and developed the "four questions" framework, which addresses the causation, development, function, and evolution of behavior. He is well known for his studies of sticklebacks and their courtship behaviors, showing how specific stimuli trigger complex behavior. - Konrad Lorenz is famous for describing filial imprinting (filial- when it refers to an individual), where young birds form attachments to the first moving object they see, typically their mother. He also explored social bonds in animals. - Karl von Frisch decoded the communication system of honeybees. He identified 2 primary types of dances: the round dance, performed when the food source is within **approximately 80 m of the hive,** and the waggle dance, food source is located farther than 80 m away, the dance involves a **figure-eight pattern**. During the waggle portion of the dance, the bee communicates both the **distance** and **direction** of the food source **relative to the sun's position**. 4. **How can you determine for a given species if a certain behavior is or is it not a fixed action pattern?** **Fixed Action Pattern (FAP)** is a sequence of instinctive, highly stereotyped behaviors that are characteristic of a species. These behaviors are innate, meaning they are not learned, and once triggered, they follow a predictable and unchangeable sequence. To determine if a behavior is a Fixed Action Pattern (FAP), it must meet several key characteristics. FAPs are highly stereotyped, meaning they are performed in the same way by all members of the species under the right conditions, and they follow a specific, predictable sequence each time. These behaviors are innate, not learned, and are triggered by a specific stimulus, known as a sign stimulus or releaser. Once triggered, the behavior runs to completion without needing further stimulation, even if the stimulus is removed. It is self-exhausting, meaning it completes itself and does not require continuous input. For example, the egg-retrieval behavior in graylag geese is a FAP because it is triggered by the sight of an egg and always follows the same sequence of actions. In summary, to identify a FAP, the behavior must be stereotyped, innate, triggered by a specific stimulus, and run to completion once started. 5. **Discuss the relevance of the comparative method, also providing an example.** The comparative method is a powerful tool in animal behavior research, allowing scientists to study behaviors across different species to uncover their evolutionary purposes and functions. By comparing species, researchers can identify patterns that explain why certain behaviors evolved and how they function in various ecological contexts. For example the balloon fly *Hilara sartor* uses silk balloons in courtship, puzzling researchers since the balloons are often empty, and the species is not carnivorous. Using the comparative method, scientists found the behavior evolved from a carnivorous ancestor where the balloon initially served to distract females, provide nutrition, and signal male fitness. Over time, the balloon became purely symbolic, requiring significant energy to produce, which still demonstrates fitness. This example shows how the comparative method traces evolutionary origins to explain complex behaviors, offering insights into animal behavior and adaptation. Another example is the study where they compare humans and pigeons on rotational invariance, the ability to recognize an object regardless of its rotation. Participants viewed a shape and identified whether rotated versions matched the original. Humans, using button presses, recognized rotated shapes but took longer with greater rotation angles, consistent with mental rotation processes. Pigeons, trained to peck for rewards, also identified rotated shapes but showed no increase in response time for larger rotations, suggesting they used a different strategy. While humans likely employed mental rotation, pigeons may have relied on recognizing consistent visual features across rotations. 6. **What does the "Null Hypothesis" state in the field of animal cognition?** The **Null Hypothesis** in animal cognition, proposed by Euan MacPhail, suggests that all species possess equal intelligence, each adapted to its ecological niche. Rather than ranking species on a linear scale of intelligence, it emphasizes that cognitive abilities are specialized to address the unique survival challenges of each species. For instance, bees excel at navigating flowers, while primates are skilled at problem-solving, but neither is more \"intelligent\" in a universal sense. This hypothesis challenges the human-centric view of intelligence and encourages researchers to focus on the diversity of cognitive strategies across species, rather than comparing them to arbitrary (based on random choice or personal whim, rather than any logical reason or system) human standards. In experimental design, the Null Hypothesis assumes there is no difference in cognitive abilities between groups or conditions unless proven otherwise through empirical data. For example, when testing problem-solving abilities, researchers start by assuming no difference between two groups of animals. If evidence shows a significant difference, the null hypothesis is rejected. MacPhail\'s work suggests that more complex species may require more training for specific tasks, but this does not imply superior intelligence. Intelligence is viewed as an adaptation to each species\' specific niche, not a hierarchical trait. 7. **What considerations can be made on the roles of evolutionary convergence (analogy) vs. shared ancestry (homology) in the evolution of the mind?** The roles of evolutionary convergence (analogy) and shared ancestry (homology) are key considerations when exploring the evolution of cognitive abilities across species. **Homology** refers to traits that are similar due to shared ancestry, even if their functions differ. For example, the forelimbs of vertebrates, including humans, cats, and whales, share a common skeletal structure inherited from a common ancestor. Similarly, homologous cognitive traits across species suggest a shared evolutionary origin and can provide insights into conserved genetic elements responsible for specific cognitive functions. On the other hand, **analogy** refers to traits that evolved independently in different species due to similar environmental pressures, such as echolocation in bats and whales or the camera eye in both cephalopods and humans. While these traits arise from different evolutionary origins, they share a similar function due to convergent evolution. Both processes highlight how cognitive traits can arise and adapt in different species. **Homology** shows the continuity of cognition across related species, while **analogy** demonstrates how different species can develop similar cognitive solutions to address similar environmental challenges. Understanding the interplay between these two evolutionary processes allows researchers to gain a more comprehensive understanding of cognitive diversity across the animal kingdom, revealing both common cognitive heritage and unique adaptations. 8. **What is a species' umwelt?** The concept of **umwelt**, coined by Jakob von Uexküll, describes an organism\'s unique sensory world, shaped by its ecological and physiological needs. Each species perceives and interacts with its environment through sensory cues vital for survival. For instance, a tick's umwelt is extremely limited, encompassing the detection of butyric acid, warmth, and liquid---cues essential for locating a host. This simplified sensory focus ensures the tick\'s survival and reproduction, demonstrating how evolution tailors perceptual worlds to specific ecological roles. By highlighting the subjective experience of different species, umwelt underscores the diversity of life's sensory realities and challenges anthropocentric views. As humans, our understanding of other species\' experiences is constrained by our own sensory and cognitive frameworks, making concepts like umwelt invaluable in exploring the relationship between behavior, evolution, and perception​. Every animal has its own sensory world, its own thin slice of the fullness of reality that it can detect. Evolution has shaped the senses of animals according to their needs, but no animal can sense everything. There is so much information out there that to be able to detect it all would be an overwhelming experience and also unnecessary. The word "umwelt" was popularized and defined by a German zoologist named Jakob von Uexküll in the early 20th century. It comes from the German word for environment, but he meant the animals\' sensory environment. And that\'s the specific set of sights, smells, textures, and sounds that that animal has access to and that another animal might not. For most animals, taste is about food. It\'s about trying to work out whether something is worth eating or not. And for humans, food is something that we put in our mouths. But if you are a very small animal, food can be something you land on. And which is why for many insects taste buds are some things that are found in their feet as well as in their mouths. A fly landing on the apple that you are trying to eat can taste it just by walking on it before you put it in your mouth. Humans have two eyes, they sit in the front of our face and they point forwards, which means that our visual world is always in front of us and we walk into it. But most birds have eyes on the sides of their heads, which means their visual world is around them. They often have close to wraparound vision, seeing to the sides and also a little bit to the back. And then of course there are changes that can occur over an animal\'s lifetime. So the umwelts of an adult might be different to the umwelts of a juvenile. (Jumping spiders are very driven by vision. They have excellent eyes. But those eyes also become more sensitive as they get older, more sensitive to light, which means that I think the world of a jumping spider will get brighter as it ages.) 9. **How can we study animal perception? Give one example.** Animal perception is studied through controlled experiments to understand sensory and cognitive adaptations, using methods tailored to specific sensory modalities. Behavioral experiments are common, involving tasks like shape discrimination, color perception, and responses to visual illusions. For instance, animals are trained to distinguish shapes, such as triangles and circles, using conditioning and reinforcement. These studies analyze visual processing, learning, and decision-making. Amodal completion, the ability to perceive occluded objects as whole, has been investigated in various species. Mice trained to discriminate between a full circle and a circle missing a quadrant showed evidence of recognizing occluded objects. Similarly, pigeons were tested on discriminating between versions of Charlie Brown with reversed features but failed, likely due to their reliance on local rather than global object recognition. In chicks, imprinting was used to study amodal completion; chicks imprinted on a full red triangle preferred an occluded version over a fragmented one, demonstrating the ability to perceive the whole figure. Such experiments highlight species-specific sensory adaptations, shaped by evolutionary and ecological needs, and provide insights into how animals perceive their environments. ?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 10. **What is the difference between primary vs. secondary imprinting?** Imprinting is a quick and lasting learning process in which animals form attachments to specific objects or individuals during a critical period shortly after birth or hatching. This process is unique because it occurs without trial-and-error learning and is largely irreversible once the critical period ends. Primary imprinting happens first, where the attachment typically forms with a parent or caregiver, ensuring care and survival. Secondary imprinting may occur later, allowing animals to form new attachments based on subsequent experiences, though the original bond remains intact. For secondary imprinting to succeed, specific conditions must be met: the new object must be natural, or both the initial and new objects must be either natural (a biological mother) or artificial. If the first object is natural and the second artificial, secondary imprinting is unlikely. This flexibility in secondary imprinting aids in the animal\'s social and environmental adaptation while retaining the memory of the initial bond. Imprinting is one of the key concepts of ethology. It was brought to the public's eye by Konrad Lorenz, although it had been reported by other researchers before. Imprinting is the process by which ground-dwelling birds form everlasting attachment to the first object they encounter, which is usually their mother, during a critical short period soon after they are born. However, these bonds can be formed with other natural objects or species different from the animal that is being imprinted, leading to cross-species adoption. In fact, Lorenz managed to become the imprinting object of geese, which followed him around and considered him their caregiver. Once imprinting is done, it can rarely be reversed, and this requires very specific conditions. It is also possible to imprint animals to a second object, which is termed secondary imprinting. This can be done if the primary imprinting object is artificial, and the secondary imprinting object is natural, or if both the primary and the secondary imprinting object are artificial. Additionally, secondary imprinting is more likely to occur if the imprinting object is the actual caregiver of the animal. However, even if secondary imprinting is successful, the primary object is almost never forgotten. 11. **Is imprinting predisposed in precocious birds? Why yes or why not?** Imprinting is predisposed in precocial birds because their advanced developmental state at birth requires rapid learning and bonding for survival. Precocial birds, like geese and ducks, are born highly developed and mobile, enabling them to quickly identify and attach to a caregiver. This early attachment ensures they receive guidance, protection, and survival skills. Lorenz demonstrated that precocial species imprint strongly and rapidly, as this process is essential for their immediate independence. In contrast, altricial species, such as sparrows, are born blind and helpless, relying on extended parental care, which results in slower and less pronounced imprinting. Filial imprinting in precocial birds helps them identify and follow caregivers, guiding their behavior and social interactions. While imprinting can occur with animate or inanimate objects, precocial birds strongly prefer animate ones, enhancing their ability to bond and adapt. This predisposition to imprinting is critical for their early survival and development. Imprinting is one of the key concepts of ethology. It was brought to the public's eye by Konrad Lorenz, although it had been reported by other researchers before. Imprinting is the process by which ground-dwelling birds form everlasting attachment to the first object they encounter, which is usually their mother, during a critical short period soon after they are born. This behavior is especially highlighted in precocious birds, which are already significantly developed at birth. These birds have an innate idea of what their mother should look like, which makes imprinting easier. They need to form the bond with their caregiver as soon as possible, in order to start learning and survive. On the contrary, altricial birds do not display imprinting as much as precocious birds. This is because they still develop during the post-natal period, and are born blind and vulnerable. They therefore do not need to have an idea of what their mother should look like, but bond with the object that provides care and nurture during their development. 12. Ebbinghaus illusion The Ebbinghaus illusion is an optical illusion where the perceived size of a central shape (target) is influenced by surrounding shapes (inducers). While the evolutionary basis of this phenomenon is debated, studying its presence in various species provides clues about its origins. In humans, cultural factors greatly influence perception of the illusion. For example, the Himba tribe in Namibia, with little exposure to Western culture, is less affected by the illusion than British participants. This suggests that culture impacts how we perceive the illusion. Biology also plays a role. Research on 5- to 8-month-old infants shows that they perceive the illusion, indicating it is universal and innate, although culture can shape its expression. In animals, the story becomes more complex. Monkeys, for instance, are less affected by the illusion than humans, suggesting shared ancestry alone does not explain its evolution. However, the illusion is present in other species, such as dolphins, birds, and fish. Pigeons even perceive it in reverse, seeing the target as smaller when surrounded by larger inducers. These findings suggest the Ebbinghaus illusion likely evolved independently in some species (convergent evolution), as an adaptation to similar environmental or perceptual challenges. This mix of biological, cultural, and evolutionary factors highlights the complexity of understanding this illusion across species.