Metacognition allows one to monitor
and adaptively control cognitive processes. Reports from the last
15 years show that when given the opportunity, nonhuman animals
selectively avoid taking difficult tests of memory or perception,
collect more information if needed before taking tests, or “gamble” more
food reward on correct than on incorrect responses in tests of
memory and perception. I review representative examples from this
literature, considering the sufficiency of four classes of mechanism
to account for the metacognitive performance observed. This analysis
suggests that many of the demonstrations of metacognition in nonhumans
can be explained in terms of associative learning or other mechanisms
that do not require invoking introspection or access to private
mental states. Consideration of these accounts may prompt greater
appreciation of the diversity of metacognitive phenomena and may
inform theoretical positions about the nature of the mental representations
underlying metacognition. |
|
• Full-text PDF
|