Problem Solving

Question 1

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

Answer 1

MACPHIL (1982)
- 2 thought schools:
1. GRADUAL (quantitative) dif between humans/animals
2. SHARP (qualitative) dif between humans/animals
- original position = no IQ dif across species (bar humans)
- open to quantitative difs (ie. learning speed) in vertebrates; later modified to put language trained animals cognitively above non-trained

Question 2

TRIAL AND ERROR

Answer 2

• Throndike test
• NOT insight
• postulates Law of Effect
• all animals capable BUT speeds differ

Question 3

INSIGHT

Answer 3

KOHLER (1927)
- Gestalt psychology
- relations perception
- no physical activity involved
- if too difficult = trial and error
- if animal not given chance to show IQ, no evidence beyond trial/error will be found
- suggested using problems allowing solution via insight

Question 4

INSIGHT: CHIMPS

Answer 4

KOHLER
- chimps in zoos; food (banana) suspended beyond reach; chimps tries to reach food via jumping; failure -> ignored it
- crates in compound; one chimp stacked crates to get food = insightful?
- BUT anecdotal not controlled experiment; crates had been stacked for days in play

Question 5

INSIGHT: EPSTEIN ET AL (1984)

Answer 5

• pigeons could be trained to do Kohler’s chimp task (learn to move box to stand on to peck plastic banana out of reach)
• took long time; not “rapid solution” as w/chimps
• BUT proof of beh being learnable; chimps prob faster learners > pigeons; crates ^ natural for them (limbs etc)

Question 6

INSIGHT: SUMMARY

Answer 6

• insight learning evidence oft open to interpretation
  KOHLER
• anecdotal; no prior experience knowledge of animals
  EPSTEIN
• training experience produced seemingly intelligent/insightful beh (existence proof)
• aka. insight VS instrumental learning

Question 7

SPATIAL INTELLIGENCE: KOHLER (1925)

Answer 7

• detour test
• key feature = food distance from fence
• animal can see food through fence but cannot reach it
• can it realise it must move away from fence to get it?

Question 8

SPATIAL INTELLIGENCE: POUCET (1983)

Answer 8

• detour test
• cats; transparent VS opaque barriers; some solve problem via moving away from food for optimal route
• IQ? or instrumental > Pavlovian? difficult to achieve (ie. omission schedules)

Question 9

TOOL USE

Answer 9

• using external object as functional extension to attain immediate goal
• many animals observed engaging w/primitive tool use (IQ indicator?) ie. dropping stone on mussel

Question 10

TOOL USE: KOHLER

Answer 10

• chimps; food in tube but unreachable
• solution = poke it out w/stick
• again, cannot tell if quick learned response VS immediate solution

Question 11

TOOL USE: POVINELLI (2000)

Answer 11

• causal inference evidence
• food in transparent perspex tube blocked at either end; tool to reach w/
• must learn to push in only 1 direction or food gets trapped
• chimps learn over several trials BUT not statsig on first trial

Question 12

TOOL SELECTIVITY

Answer 12

CHAPPELL & KACELNIK (2002)
- New Caledonian crows (v clever)
- learn similar tube task to Povinelli (2000)
- select right length stick to reach food

Question 13

TOOL CONSTRUCTION

Answer 13

WEIR, CHAPPELL & KACELNIK (2002)
- New Caledonian crows
- crow can hook bent wire around bucket handle in tube; lifts out to get food
- BUT again: first trial?

Question 14

SUMMARY

Answer 14

• Q = if animals show insight beyond trial/error learning aka. do they understand the problem?
• many anecdotal beh accounts = YES
• BUT lab demos = > difficult than if actual answer