Evolution of cognition

Last updated

The evolution of cognition is the process by which life on Earth has gone from organisms with little to no cognitive function to a greatly varying display of cognitive function that we see in organisms today. Animal cognition is largely studied by observing behavior, which makes studying extinct species difficult. The definition of cognition varies by discipline; psychologists tend define cognition by human behaviors, while ethologists have widely varying definitions. Ethological definitions of cognition range from only considering cognition in animals to be behaviors exhibited in humans, while others consider anything action involving a nervous system to be cognitive.

Contents

Methods of study

Studying the evolution of cognition is accomplished through a comparative cognitive approach [1] [2] [3] where a cognitive ability and comparing it between closely related species and distantly related species. For example, a researcher may want to analyze the connection between spatial memory and food caching behavior. By examining two closely related animals (chickadees and jays) and/or two distantly related animals (jays and chipmunks), hypotheses could be generated about when and how this cognitive ability evolved. Another way cognition has been studied in animals, specifically insects, is through a cognitive test battery. This method measures "intelligence directly with a battery of cognitive tests rather than relying on proxies like relative brain size." [4]

Animals with high levels of cognition

Higher cognitive processes have evolved in many closely and distantly related animals. Some of these examples are considered convergent evolution, while others most likely shared a common ancestor that possessed higher cognitive function. For example, apes, humans, and cetaceans most likely had a common ancestor with high levels of cognition, and as these species diverged they all possessed this trait. Corvids (the crow family) and apes show similar cognitive abilities in some areas such as tool use. This ability is most likely an example of convergent evolution, due to their distant relatedness.

Selection favoring cognition

Social living

Social living is thought to have co-evolved with higher cognitive processes. It is hypothesized that higher cognitive function evolved to mitigate the negative effects of living in social groups. For example, the ability to recognize individual groups members could solve the problem of cheating behavior. If individuals within the group can keep track of the cheaters, then they can punish or exclude them from the group. There is also a positive correlation between relative brain size and aspects of sociality in some species [16] [17] There are many benefits to living in social groups such as division of labor and protection, but in order to reap these benefits the animals tend to possess high levels of cognition.

Sex, mating, and relationships

Many animals have complex mating rituals require higher levels of cognition to evaluate. [3] Birds are well known for their intense mating displays including swan dances that can last hours or even days. [18] There has also been studies on sexual selection and evolution of cognition in seed beetles. It shows that "cognitive ability did show sex-specificity: strong sexual selection improved cognitive ability for males but not females." [19]

Higher levels of cognition may have evolved to facilitate the formation of longer lasting relationships. Animals that form pair bonds and share parental responsibilities produce offspring that are more likely to survive and reproduce, which increases the fitness of these individuals. The cognitive requirements for this type of mating include the ability the differentiate individuals from their group and resolve social conflicts. [17]

Finding, extracting, and protecting food

Another hypothesis for the evolution of cognition is that cognition allowed individuals access to food and resources that were previously unavailable. For example, the genetic mutation for color vision allowed for a greatly increased efficiency in finding and foraging fruit. [1] Food caching behavior displayed in some birds and mammals is an example of a behavior that may have co-evolved with higher cognitive processes. This ability to store food for later consumption allows these animals to take advantage of temporary surpluses in food availability. [20] Corvids have displayed incredible abilities to create and remember the locations of up to hundreds of caches. [21] In addition, there is evidence that this is not just an instinctual behavior, but an example of future planning. Jays have been found to diversify the types of food they cache, possible indicating they understand the need to eat a variety of food. [22] Some supporters of this hypothesis suggest that higher cognitive processes require a large brain to body ratio. This higher brain to body size ratio in turn requires a large metabolic input to function. The idea is that the two processes (greater access to food and the brain's growing need for energy) may have snowballed the evolution of these two features.

Technology, tools, innovation, and culture

The cognitive ability to use tools and pass information from one generation to the next is thought to have been a driving force of the evolution of cognition. Many animals use tools including: primates, elephants, cetaceans, birds, fish, and some invertebrates. [3] Tool use varies widely depending on the species. For example, sea otters have been observed using a rock to break open snail shells, while primates and New Caledonian crows have demonstrated an ability to fashion a new tool for a specific use. [23] The ability to use tools seems to provide animals with a fitness advantage, usually in the form of access to food previously unavailable, which allows a competitive advantage for these individuals.

Some animals have demonstrated the ability to pass information from one generation to the next (culture) including: primates, cetaceans, and birds. [3] Primates and birds can pass information of specific tool use strategies on to their offspring who can, in turn, pass it on to their offspring. In this way, the information can remain in a group on individuals even after the original users are gone. One famous example of this is in a group of macaque monkeys in Japan. Researchers studying this species observed these monkeys feeding behavior in a population in Japan. The researchers witnessed one female, named Imo, realize that by washing potatoes in the nearby river you could remove much more sand and dirt then by simply wiping it off. Over the next few generations the researcher saw this behavior begin to appear in other individuals throughout the group. [24]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Corvidae</span> Family of perching birds

Corvidae is a cosmopolitan family of oscine passerine birds that contains the crows, ravens, rooks, magpies, jackdaws, jays, treepies, choughs, and nutcrackers. In colloquial English, they are known as the crow family or corvids. Currently, 135 species are included in this family. The genus Corvus containing 47 species makes up over a third of the entire family. Corvids (ravens) are the largest passerines.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Machiavellian intelligence</span>

In primatology, machiavellian intelligence is the capacity of an organism to be in a successful political engagement with social groups. The first introduction of this concept came from Frans de Waal's book Chimpanzee Politics (1982), which described social maneuvering while explicitly quoting Machiavelli.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Cetacean intelligence</span> Intellectual capacity of cetaceans

Cetacean intelligence is the overall intelligence and derived cognitive ability of aquatic mammals belonging in the infraorder Cetacea (cetaceans), including baleen whales, porpoises, and dolphins.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Animal cognition</span> Intelligence of non-human animals

Animal cognition encompasses the mental capacities of non-human animals including insect cognition. The study of animal conditioning and learning used in this field was developed from comparative psychology. It has also been strongly influenced by research in ethology, behavioral ecology, and evolutionary psychology; the alternative name cognitive ethology is sometimes used. Many behaviors associated with the term animal intelligence are also subsumed within animal cognition.

Dog intelligence or dog cognition is the process in dogs of acquiring information and conceptual skills, and storing them in memory, retrieving, combining and comparing them, and using them in new situations.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Brain–body mass ratio</span> Measurement used for rough estimate of the intelligence of an animal

Brain–body mass ratio, also known as the brain–body weight ratio, is the ratio of brain mass to body mass, which is hypothesized to be a rough estimate of the intelligence of an animal, although fairly inaccurate in many cases. A more complex measurement, encephalization quotient, takes into account allometric effects of widely divergent body sizes across several taxa. The raw brain-to-body mass ratio is however simpler to come by, and is still a useful tool for comparing encephalization within species or between fairly closely related species.

Encephalization quotient (EQ), encephalization level (EL), or just encephalization is a relative brain size measure that is defined as the ratio between observed and predicted brain mass for an animal of a given size, based on nonlinear regression on a range of reference species. It has been used as a proxy for intelligence and thus as a possible way of comparing the intelligence levels of different species. For this purpose, it is a more refined measurement than the raw brain-to-body mass ratio, as it takes into account allometric effects. Expressed as a formula, the relationship has been developed for mammals and may not yield relevant results when applied outside this group.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Hoarding (animal behavior)</span> Behavior; storage of food in hidden locations

Hoarding or caching in animal behavior is the storage of food in locations hidden from the sight of both conspecifics and members of other species. Most commonly, the function of hoarding or caching is to store food in times of surplus for times when food is less plentiful. However, there is evidence that a certain amount of caching or hoarding is actually undertaken with the aim of ripening the food so stored, and this practice is thus referred to as ‘ripening caching’. The term hoarding is most typically used for rodents, whereas caching is more commonly used in reference to birds, but the behaviors in both animal groups are quite similar.

The evolution of human intelligence is closely tied to the evolution of the human brain and to the origin of language. The timeline of human evolution spans approximately seven million years, from the separation of the genus Pan until the emergence of behavioral modernity by 50,000 years ago. The first three million years of this timeline concern Sahelanthropus, the following two million concern Australopithecus and the final two million span the history of the genus Homo in the Paleolithic era.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Bird intelligence</span> Study of intelligence in birds

The difficulty of defining or measuring intelligence in non-human animals makes the subject difficult to study scientifically in birds. In general, birds have relatively large brains compared to their head size. Furthermore, bird brains have twice the neuron packing density of mammal brains, for higher overall efficiency. The visual and auditory senses are well developed in most species, though the tactile and olfactory senses are well realized only in a few groups. Birds communicate using visual signals as well as through the use of calls and song. The testing of intelligence in birds is therefore usually based on studying responses to sensory stimuli.

Cognitive specialization suggests that certain behaviors, often in the domain of social communication, are passed on to offspring and refined to be maximally beneficial by the process of natural selection. Specializations serve an adaptive purpose for an organism by allowing the organism to be better suited for its habitat. Over time, specializations often become essential to the species' continued survival. Cognitive specialization in humans has been thought to underlie the acquisition, development, and evolution of language, theory of mind, and specific social skills such as trust and reciprocity. These specializations are considered to be critical to the survival of the species, even though there are successful individuals who lack certain specializations, including those diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder or who lack language abilities. Cognitive specialization is also believed to underlie adaptive behaviors such as self-awareness, navigation, and problem solving skills in several animal species such as chimpanzees and bottlenose dolphins.

Animal culture can be defined as the ability of non-human animals to learn and transmit behaviors through processes of social or cultural learning. Culture is increasingly seen as a process, involving the social transmittance of behavior among peers and between generations. It can involve the transmission of novel behaviors or regional variations that are independent of genetic or ecological factors.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mate choice</span> One of the primary mechanisms under which evolution can occur

Mate choice is one of the primary mechanisms under which evolution can occur. It is characterized by a "selective response by animals to particular stimuli" which can be observed as behavior. In other words, before an animal engages with a potential mate, they first evaluate various aspects of that mate which are indicative of quality—such as the resources or phenotypes they have—and evaluate whether or not those particular trait(s) are somehow beneficial to them. The evaluation will then incur a response of some sort.

Comparative cognition is the comparative study of the mechanisms and origins of cognition in various species, and is sometimes seen as more general than, or similar to, comparative psychology. From a biological point of view, work is being done on the brains of fruit flies that should yield techniques precise enough to allow an understanding of the workings of the human brain on a scale appreciative of individual groups of neurons rather than the more regional scale previously used. Similarly, gene activity in the human brain is better understood through examination of the brains of mice by the Seattle-based Allen Institute for Brain Science, yielding the freely available Allen Brain Atlas. This type of study is related to comparative cognition, but better classified as one of comparative genomics. Increasing emphasis in psychology and ethology on the biological aspects of perception and behavior is bridging the gap between genomics and behavioral analysis.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Animal consciousness</span> Quality or state of self-awareness within an animal

Animal consciousness, or animal awareness, is the quality or state of self-awareness within an animal, or of being aware of an external object or something within itself. In humans, consciousness has been defined as: sentience, awareness, subjectivity, qualia, the ability to experience or to feel, wakefulness, having a sense of selfhood, and the executive control system of the mind. Despite the difficulty in definition, many philosophers believe there is a broadly shared underlying intuition about what consciousness is.

Primate cognition is the study of the intellectual and behavioral skills of non-human primates, particularly in the fields of psychology, behavioral biology, primatology, and anthropology.

Culture and social cognition is the relationship between human culture and human cognitive capabilities. Cultural cognitive evolution proposes that humans’ unique cognitive capacities are not solely due to biological inheritance, but are in fact due in large part to cultural transmission and evolution. Modern humans and great apes are separated evolutionarily by about six million years. Proponents of cultural evolution argue that this would not have been enough time for humans to develop the advanced cognitive capabilities required to create tools, language, and build societies through biological evolution. Biological evolution could not have individually produced each of these cognitive capabilities within that period of time. Instead, humans must have evolved the capacity to learn through cultural transmission. This provides a more plausible explanation that would fit within the given time frame. Instead of having to biologically account for each cognitive mechanism that distinguishes modern humans from previous relatives, one would only have to account for one significant biological adaptation for cultural learning. According to this view, the ability to learn through cultural transmission is what distinguishes humans from other primates. Cultural learning allows humans to build on existing knowledge and make collective advancements, also known as the “ratchet effect”. The ratchet effect simply refers to the way in which humans continuously add on to existing knowledge through modifications and improvements. This unique ability distinguishes humans from related primates, who do not seem to build collaborative knowledge over time. Instead, primates seem to build individual knowledge, in which the expertise of one animal is not built on by others, and does not progress across time.

Number sense in animals is the ability of creatures to represent and discriminate quantities of relative sizes by number sense. It has been observed in various species, from fish to primates. Animals are believed to have an approximate number system, the same system for number representation demonstrated by humans, which is more precise for smaller quantities and less so for larger values. An exact representation of numbers higher than three has not been attested in wild animals, but can be demonstrated after a period of training in captive animals.

Theory of mind in animals is an extension to non-human animals of the philosophical and psychological concept of theory of mind (ToM), sometimes known as mentalisation or mind-reading. It involves an inquiry into whether non-human animals have the ability to attribute mental states to themselves and others, including recognition that others have mental states that are different from their own. To investigate this issue experimentally, researchers place non-human animals in situations where their resulting behavior can be interpreted as supporting ToM or not.

Researchers study the reactions of animals observing humans performing magic tricks in order to better understand animal cognition. Using these studies, evolutionary psychologists aim to gain insights into the evolution of perception and attention by comparing responses of different species, including humans.

References

  1. 1 2 Dukas, Reuven (2004). "Evolutionary Biology of Animal Cognition". Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics. 35: 347–374. doi:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.35.112202.130152. JSTOR   30034120.
  2. 1 2 Matsuzawa, Tetsuro (2009-10-01). "The chimpanzee mind: in search of the evolutionary roots of the human mind". Animal Cognition. 12 (1): S1–9. doi:10.1007/s10071-009-0277-1. ISSN   1435-9448. PMID   19727864. S2CID   7028415.
  3. 1 2 3 4 van Horik, Jayden; Emery, Nathan J. (2011-11-01). "Evolution of cognition". Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science. 2 (6): 621–633. doi:10.1002/wcs.144. ISSN   1939-5086. PMID   26302412.
  4. ↑ Simons, Meagan; Tibbetts, Elizabeth (2019-08-01). "Insects as models for studying the evolution of animal cognition". Current Opinion in Insect Science. Vectors and medical and veterinary entomology • Social insects. 34: 117–122. doi: 10.1016/j.cois.2019.05.009 . ISSN   2214-5745.
  5. ↑ Premack, David (2007-08-28). "Human and animal cognition: Continuity and discontinuity". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 104 (35): 13861–13867. Bibcode:2007PNAS..10413861P. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0706147104 . PMC   1955772 . PMID   17717081.
  6. ↑ Boesch, Christophe (2007). "What makes us human (Homo sapiens)? The challenge of cognitive cross-species comparison". Journal of Comparative Psychology. 121 (3): 227–240. CiteSeerX   10.1.1.466.4972 . doi:10.1037/0735-7036.121.3.227. PMID   17696649.
  7. ↑ Heyes, Cecilia (2012-08-05). "New thinking: the evolution of human cognition". Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences. 367 (1599): 2091–2096. doi:10.1098/rstb.2012.0111. ISSN   0962-8436. PMC   3385676 . PMID   22734052.
  8. ↑ Reiss, Diana; Marino, Lori (2001-05-08). "Mirror self-recognition in the bottlenose dolphin: A case of cognitive convergence". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 98 (10): 5937–5942. Bibcode:2001PNAS...98.5937R. doi: 10.1073/pnas.101086398 . PMC   33317 . PMID   11331768.
  9. ↑ Mills, Gus; Mills, Margie (2010). Hyena nights & Kalahari days. Auckland Park, South Africa: Jacana Media. ISBN   978-1770098114. OCLC   797826016.
  10. ↑ Mendes, Natacha; Hanus, Daniel; Call, Josep (2007-10-22). "Raising the level: orangutans use water as a tool". Biology Letters. 3 (5): 453–455. doi:10.1098/rsbl.2007.0198. ISSN   1744-9561. PMC   2391177 . PMID   17609175.
  11. ↑ Fugazza, Claudia; Pogány, Ákos; Miklósi, Ádám (2016). "Recall of Others' Actions after Incidental Encoding Reveals Episodic-like Memory in Dogs". Current Biology. 26 (23): 3209–3213. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2016.09.057 . PMID   27889264.
  12. ↑ Plotnik, J. M.; Lair, R.; Suphachoksahakun, W.; de Waal, F. B. M. (2011). "Elephants know when they need a helping trunk in a cooperative task". PNAS. 108 (12): 5116–5121. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1101765108 . PMC   3064331 . PMID   21383191.
  13. ↑ Seed, Amanda M.; Tebbich, Sabine; Emery, Nathan J.; Clayton, Nicola S. (2006). "Investigating Physical Cognition in Rooks, Corvus frugilegus". Current Biology. 16 (7): 697–701. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2006.02.066 . PMID   16581516.
  14. ↑ Fagot, Joël; Cook, Robert G. (2006). "Evidence for large long-term memory capacities in baboons and pigeons and its implications for learning and the evolution of cognition". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 103 (46): 17564–17567. Bibcode:2006PNAS..10317564F. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0605184103 . JSTOR   30052472. PMC   1634836 . PMID   17088563.
  15. 1 2 Emery, Nathan J. (2006). "Cognitive ornithology: The evolution of avian intelligence". Philosophical Transactions: Biological Sciences. 361 (1465): 23–43. doi:10.1098/rstb.2005.1736. JSTOR   20209608. PMC   1626540 . PMID   16553307.
  16. ↑ Dunbar, R. I. M.; Shultz, Susanne (2007-09-07). "Evolution in the Social Brain". Science. 317 (5843): 1344–1347. Bibcode:2007Sci...317.1344D. doi:10.1126/science.1145463. ISSN   0036-8075. PMID   17823343. S2CID   1516792.
  17. 1 2 Emery, Nathan J.; Seed, Amanda M.; Bayern, Auguste M. P. von; Clayton, Nicola S. (2007-04-29). "Cognitive adaptations of social bonding in birds". Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences. 362 (1480): 489–505. doi:10.1098/rstb.2006.1991. ISSN   0962-8436. PMC   2346513 . PMID   17255008.
  18. ↑ Meades, Sian (2016-04-18). "These birds have the most INCREDIBLE mating ritual that lasts FIVE days". Express.co.uk. Retrieved 2018-03-26.
  19. ↑ Yeung, William (2019). "Digest: Sexual selection and evolution of cognition in seed beetles". Evolution. 73 (12): 2538–2539. ISSN   0014-3820.
  20. ↑ Male, Lucinda H.; Smulders, Tom V. (2007-03-01). "Memory for food caches: not just for retrieval". Behavioral Ecology. 18 (2): 456–459. doi: 10.1093/beheco/arl107 . ISSN   1045-2249.
  21. ↑ Sherry, David (1984). "Food storage by black-capped chickadees: Memory for the location and contents of caches". Animal Behaviour. 32 (2): 451–464. doi:10.1016/s0003-3472(84)80281-x. S2CID   53151283.
  22. ↑ de Kort, Selvino R.; Dickinson, Anthony; Clayton, Nicola S. (2005). "Retrospective cognition by food-caching western scrub-jays". Learning and Motivation. 36 (2): 159–176. doi:10.1016/j.lmot.2005.02.008.
  23. ↑ Bird, Christopher D.; Emery, Nathan J. (2009-06-23). "Insightful problem solving and creative tool modification by captive nontool-using rooks". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 106 (25): 10370–10375. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0901008106 . PMC   2700937 . PMID   19478068.
  24. ↑ K, Alfred. "Monkeys Washing Potatoes | Alfred K". alfre.dk. Retrieved 2018-03-26.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.