159009483

PS1001 - First Year University Skills Tutorial Essay Cover Sheet

Please insert your essay, and reference section into this one document and upload it all
in one file to Turnitin.

This top section to be completed

by the student in the case of
work being submitted late. Please
tick penalty level:
1 day late:____
2 days late:____
3 days late:____
4 days late:____
5 days late:____
Other: ____ days late

Late penalties will be applied

to work submitted after the
deadline (unless a mitigating
circumstances request is
successful)

TO BE COMPLETED BY THE STUDENT:

1 5 9 0 0 9 4 8 3
Student ID:

Word Count: 1195___

(Essay only excluding Reference section and this front page cover sheet)

Title: Critically assess whether non-human animals possess intelligence in ways

comparable to that of humans.__

Submission of this work is acknowledgement that you understand and accept the School and University
rules, regulations, and penalties for plagiarism/poor academic practice.

Self-reflection on Assignment
TO BE COMPLETED BY THE STUDENT:
Using the ‘Marking descriptors for essays’ (provided in PUSH and in the Year 1 Psychology
Practicals handbook – copy available online if you’ve lost your hardcopy) describe how you
used them to write this piece of work. You can also add specific comments to your marker
here, e.g. “I wasn’t sure how to refer to previous research and would appreciate feedback
focusing on this aspect”.

Self-Reflection on assignment:

1
 159009483
 Was unsure on how to reference different formats of content such as online books and pdf
files, however used the writing guide and was able to follow the guidelines to improve upon
the required APA formatting.
 Aimed to use relevant psychological content to answer the question and to be able to
highlight more critical thinking within my work.

2
 159009483

TO BE COMPLETED BY THE MARKER:

Marker: Moderated By:

Comments (with reference to what the student did well and how other aspects
might be improved)

Overall assessment of the essay in terms of degree class

STANDARD
Fail 3rd 2.2 2.1 1st
Understanding and evaluation
i.e. does the student demonstrate
understanding of relevant
theoretical material and provide an
appropriate critical evaluation of
relevant research?

Coherence of structure
i.e. do the arguments presented
follow a logical sequence?

Quality of arguments
i.e. are the arguments coherent,
insightful and original?

Appropriateness of evidence
i.e. does the essay draw on a
breadth and depth of relevant
evidence, and does the supporting
evidence justify the conclusions
reached?
Focus
i.e. are the specific issues raised
relevant to the essay title?

3
 159009483

Insert essay followed by reference section here

Critically assess whether non-human animals possess intelligence in ways

comparable to that of humans.

There has been a constant debate over the extent of cognition in non- human animals, it is still
widely claimed ‘that all vertebrates, excluding humans, have the same intelligence’ (Pearce,
2013). However, with the emergence of comparative psychology highlighting possible forms of
cognitive processes in non-human animals- such as learning, exhibited through the work of Ivan
Pavlov; the possibility that advanced cognitive processes are not uniquely human has urged
further research into the intellect of non-human animals. Researchers however, face
methodological issues when testing the similarity of human cognition to non-human animal
cognition, one problem being the lack of verbal confirmation, resulting to the need for alternative
methods when measuring non-human animal cognition. This essay will, thus, examine how
cognition is measured in non-human animals, in regard to: memory, language and tool use; also
whether these abilities are still uniquely human, and if not, what ethical issues could arise as
result.

Memory is a highly cognitive process which is continuously looked at in comparative

psychology, especially in regards to controversial topics such as, the episodic memory. The
episodic memory has always been seen as a relatively unique element in human memory, which
allows humans to remember and relive prior experiences through the retrieval of those events
from the episodic memory. However, research now indicates the possibility that non-human
animals also possess episodic-like memory, highlighting a similarity in the extent of memory
processing in non-human animals to humans. An experiment by Clayton, Griffiths, Emery and
Dickinson (2001) depicted how Jay birds were able to recall the ‘what, where and when of
specific caching events’, highlighting elements of episodic-like memory which required the
retrieval of past information so that the birds could once again access the perishable and non-
perishable food that they had previously placed in particular spots. The perishable and non-
perishable food acted as the ‘what’ in the memory recall, as the perishable food degraded quicker
than the non-perishable, thus knowledge of this as well as the retrieval of ‘when’ they were
cached and ‘where’ they placed them was important to isolate and test the episodic memory of
the Jay birds. Results showed, that the perishable food was allocated by the Jay birds before the
none perishable, and any spot which had been previously visited by the birds was not revisited
again, highlighting the integration of ‘what, where and when’ to epitomize the use of the
episodic-like memory. However, there is still limited research via comparative psychology on
4
 159009483
episodic memory as there are methodological issues; such as being unable to isolate and solely
test the episodic element within memory, therefore, making it difficult to further affirm the use
of episodic-like memory in non-human animals.

‘Primate call production operates with the same principles and physical apparatus as humans use
during speech production’ (Vilain, Schwartz, & Abry, 2011) however, the amount of cognition
used in non-human animals is in question as any acoustic communication could be a form of
associative learning eliciting the required response. However, research into the responses of
Diana monkeys driven by alarm calls highlighted casual cognition in terms of understanding the
underlying cause of the alarm signals rather than associating the alarm calls to the required
response. This is exhibited in the study done by Zuberbühler (2000); alarm calls by Guinea fowls
in regards to the presence of leopards and humans (Diana monkeys top two predators) resulted in
similar a response by the Diana monkeys. However, when the Diana monkeys were primed with
a playback of human speech or leopard growls, there was little response to the alarm calls and
response also differed depending on what they were primed with, highlighting a possible
understanding for the alarm calls, such as, ‘the predator is causing the alarm call’. Thus,
exhibiting casual cognitive processes such as semantic understanding to communication signals
rather than just a ‘one-to-one association between two types of stimuli’, however, it is still
difficult to provide a complete account on the understanding of causality by Diana monkeys
because it is impossible to know the extent of any previous exposures to alarm calls and presence
of predators which could have been the cause for the lack of response in the primed conditions.

Tool use has been a historically well-known method adopted by both humans and non-human
animals for advantageous purposes (food, protection, shelter), however how much of non-human
animal tool use is a learnt/imitated method and how much of it is a consciously understood and
driven act is now tested in comparative psychology. A study by Viselberghi, Addessi, Truppa,
Spagnoletti, Ottoni, Izar and Fragaszy (2009) depicts how wild capuchins are tasked to crack a
nut in two conditions; the first condition offers the capuchins a variety of stones in different sizes
and weights, however in the second condition the capuchins have to select a tool from visually
similar stones in size but different in weight. Naturally the capuchins select the most functional
tool in the first condition to crack the nut, however, on the second condition the capuchins
tapped the visually similar stones to get an acoustical understanding of the weight of the stone to
therefore select the most functional tool (the stone which was heaviest). The study, epitomizes
how non-human animals, such as the capuchins, are cognitively aware of the process involved in
tool use and understand it rather than perform it due to habitual imitation. This is further
exhibited in a study by Bird and Emery (2009) where by captive Rooks (bird) that do not use
tools in the wild demonstrated the use of tools to gain rewards-‘rivalling habitual tool users such
5
 159009483
as New Caledonian crows and chimpanzees’; highlighting an understanding of tool use by non-
human animals as more than just a habitual requirement.

It is evident that non-human animals possess cognitive processes such as memory, language and
tool use, however the question is, to what extent? The research on the episodic memory and the
possibility that non-human animals also possess such cognitive processing highlights major
advancements in regards to solutions when tackling memory loss or further understanding what
deficit in the brain affects episodic memory is potentially attainable through non-human animal
testing. However, methodological issues such as isolating the episodic memory for testing as
well as the limited research on the topic urges more alternative testing methods, which could
fully affirm the presence of episodic-like functioning in non-human animals. In addition, present
research has however presented the possibility of episodic like memory, the possible
understanding of acoustic calls in language and advanced knowledge on the functionality of tools
use, as well as, an understanding of its use-which is not entirely habitual, present in non-human
animals. Therefore, epitomizing that comparative psychology has highlighted the presence of
similar human cognitive processes in non-human animals and thus urged the importance of
studying non-human animal cognition. On the other hand, it has also simultaneously questioned
the ethical concepts of using species which could potentially have the advanced similar cognitive
processes as humans in regards to testing, and therefore, being one of the many issues that could
arise if non-human animals are found to significantly epitomize human-like cognition in the
foreseeable future.

References

Bird, C. D., & Emery, N. J. (2009). Insightful problem solving and creative tool modification by captive
nontool-using Rooks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of
America, 106(25), 10370–10375.
6
 159009483
Clayton, N. S., Griffiths, D. P., Emery, N. J., & Dickinson, A. (2001). Elements of episodic-like memory
in animals. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, 356(1413), 1483–1491.

Pearce, J. M. (2013). Animal Learning and cognition: An introduction (3rd Edition). London, GBR:
Psychology Press. Retrieved from http://www.ebrary.com

Vilain, A., Schwartz, J., & Abry, C. (2011). Primate communication and human language: Vocalisation,
gestures, imitation and deixis in humans and non-humans. Amsterdam, NLD: John Benjamins
Publishing Company. Retrieved from http://www.ebrary.com

Visalberghi, E., Addessi, E., Truppa, V., Spagnoletti, N., Ottoni, E., Izar, P., & Fragaszy, D. (2009).
Selection of effective stone tools by wild bearded capuchin monkeys. Current Biology, 19(3),
213–217.

Zuberbühler, K. (2000). Causal cognition in a non-human primate: field playback experiments with Diana
monkeys. Cognition, 76(3), 195–207.