Evaluation of seven hypotheses for metamemory performance in rhesus monkeys.

Abstract

Knowing the extent to which nonhumans and humans share mechanisms for metacognition will advance our understanding of cognitive evolution and will improve selection of model systems for biomedical research. Some nonhuman species avoid difficult cognitive tests, seek information when ignorant, or otherwise behave in ways consistent with metacognition. There is agreement that some nonhuman animals “succeed” in these metacognitive tasks, but little consensus about the cognitive mechanisms underlying performance. In one paradigm, rhesus monkeys visually searched for hidden food when ignorant of the location of the food, but acted immediately when knowledgeable. This result has been interpreted as evidence that monkeys introspectively monitored their memory to adaptively control information seeking. However, convincing alternative hypotheses have been advanced that might also account for the adaptive pattern of visual searching. We evaluated seven hypotheses using a computerized task in which monkeys chose either to take memory tests immediately or to see the answer again before proceeding to the test. We found no evidence to support the hypotheses of behavioral cue association, rote response learning, expectancy violation, response competition, generalized search strategy, or postural mediation. In contrast, we repeatedly found evidence to support the memory monitoring hypothesis. Monkeys chose to see the answer when memory was poor, either from natural variation or experimental manipulation. We found limited evidence that monkeys also monitored the fluency of memory access. Overall, the evidence indicates that rhesus monkeys can use memory strength as a discriminative cue for information seeking, consistent with introspective monitoring of explicit memory.

Not knowing what one knows: A Meaningful failure of metacognition in capuchin monkeys.

“…This includes generalizing the use of the UR across a size discrimination task, a brightness discrimination task, an arch-length discrimination task, a line orientation discrimination task, a metamemory task, and a prospective metamemory task. The monkeys successfully transferred the use of the UR across the tasks, this transfer was observed in the first test session, and the UR-transfer was more successful across successive task exposures (also see Basile et al, 2015). Results from monkeys (A) Lou and (B) Murph in a task with variable numbers of rewards at risk and the need to make a density discrimination.…”

“…Yet again, humans ( Figure 2A) and monkeys ( Figure 2B) displayed an increase in the use of the UR corresponding with a decrease in use of the categorization responses for the most difficult trials. Other experiments explored metacognition in rhesus monkeys and showed that the use of the UR or other metacognitive responses transfers across a variety of different tasks (Basile, Schroeder, Brown, Templer, & Hampton, 2015;Brown, Templer, & Hampton, 2017;Kornell, Son, & Terrace, 2007;Smith, Redford, Beran, & Washburn, 2010;Templer & Hampton, 2012) and that monkeys will continue using the UR when feedback is delayed (Smith, Beran, Redford, & Washburn, 2006), minimizing the likelihood that task-specific environmental cues are responsible for the use of the UR. Figure 1. A.…”

“…From "The Comparative Psychology of Uncertainty Monitoring and Metacognition," by J. D. Smith, W. E. Shields, and D. A. Washburn, 2003, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 26, p. If monkeys genuinely demonstrate metacognition through their behavior, then such metacognition should express itself across a variety of different tasks that provide converging evidence to support the weight of the claim for private metacognitive capacities in animals. Such tasks include the uncertainty response already discussed (e.g., Smith et al, 1997), information-seeking responses in computerized tasks (e.g., Beran & Smith, 2011), responses that show confidence in prior decisions (e.g., Beran et al, 2015), and metamemory tasks in which the animal may have forgotten some previously learned material, and may need to decline a memory test or to seek out additional information (e.g., Basile et al, 2015;Hampton, 2001;Marsh & MacDonald, 2012a). Information-seeking tasks involve introducing subjects to trials in which they sometimes need to proactively seek visual information to observe in order to correctly respond.…”

Animal Consciousness

“…In monkeys and rats, some studies have also developed a "play it again paradigm". Monkeys had to recall and reproduce the location of two squares on a touchscreen, but the target stimuli were no longer visible during the response period (macaques and baboons: Basile et al, 2015;Malassis et al, 2015). In rats, the subjects had to classify a brief noise as short or long (Foote and Crystal, 2012).…”

Cow Persons? How to Find Out

“…The advances in research on metacognition in monkeys (e.g. Basile et at., 2015) and apes (e.g. Call & Carpenter, 2001) may be used to design experiments to test for metacognitive abilities in cows.…”