Rational Animals? Conscious Behavior?

Psych 1090Lecture 16

A little knowledge is a dangerous thing;A little knowledge is a dangerous thing;

Drink deep or taste not the Pierian spring:Drink deep or taste not the Pierian spring:

There shallow draughts intoxicate the There shallow draughts intoxicate the brain,brain,

And drinking deeply sobers us again….And drinking deeply sobers us again….

Alexander Pope, Alexander Pope, Essay on Criticism, pt. Essay on Criticism, pt. iiii

but rather attempt to devise clear, but rather attempt to devise clear, clean, testable hypotheses….clean, testable hypotheses….

One must be careful, in a One must be careful, in a relatively young field, that of relatively young field, that of

animal consciousnessanimal consciousness

not to become intoxicated by thenot to become intoxicated by the excitement of examining the new area,excitement of examining the new area,

Or, at least, put our Or, at least, put our knowledge into knowledge into perspective…perspective…

And, of course, one issue with respect And, of course, one issue with respect to consciousness involves to consciousness involves

rationality….rationality….Because one tends to assume that Because one tends to assume that conscious decisions are rational…conscious decisions are rational…

That is, that an individual wouldn’t That is, that an individual wouldn’t consciously do something stupid…consciously do something stupid…

Now, we’ve spent the semester Now, we’ve spent the semester looking at how nonhumans solve looking at how nonhumans solve

complex problems in ways that are complex problems in ways that are often similar to that of humans….often similar to that of humans….

Nevertheless researchers sometimes Nevertheless researchers sometimes find, in subjects that otherwise appear find, in subjects that otherwise appear

quite intelligent, quite intelligent,

behavior that doesn’t seem behavior that doesn’t seem rationalrational

Or rational Or rational at least by human at least by human standards…standards…

Do these ‘irrational’ actions mean that Do these ‘irrational’ actions mean that the animals are not intelligent or the animals are not intelligent or

unconscious?unconscious?

Are consciousness, rationality, and Are consciousness, rationality, and intelligence interchangeable?intelligence interchangeable?

Are these terms even Are these terms even interchangeable for humans?interchangeable for humans?

Sometimes an animal may respond in Sometimes an animal may respond in a task in a way that is different from a task in a way that is different from

that of humans that of humans

because of a different evolutionary or because of a different evolutionary or social history…social history…

that is, because behavior patterns that is, because behavior patterns different from those that would be different from those that would be

exhibited by humans in such a exhibited by humans in such a situation situation

increased fitness in the pastincreased fitness in the past

Thus the animal may react in a way Thus the animal may react in a way that, by human standards, seems that, by human standards, seems

irrational….irrational….The inability of Boysen’s chimpanzees The inability of Boysen’s chimpanzees

to inhibit their choice of a larger to inhibit their choice of a larger amount of candies,amount of candies,

even after experiencing that whatever even after experiencing that whatever they choose will always go to their they choose will always go to their

partnerpartner

is such an exampleis such an example…it doesn’t …it doesn’t happen in the ‘real’ worldhappen in the ‘real’ world

So how can we judge animal So how can we judge animal consciousnessconsciousness

if we are having trouble judging if we are having trouble judging animal rationality?animal rationality?

How can we devise experiments and How can we devise experiments and collect datacollect data

without relying on our human without relying on our human biases? biases?

Well, actually, life isn’t quite that Well, actually, life isn’t quite that difficult, difficult,

because, most of the time, the because, most of the time, the intelligent response is indeed also intelligent response is indeed also

rational, rational,

according to both animal and according to both animal and human expectationshuman expectations

Even though there is a big question Even though there is a big question as to whether it is fair to judge as to whether it is fair to judge animals on the basis of human-animals on the basis of human-

biased testsbiased tests

we’ve seen that most of the time, we’ve seen that most of the time, human and animal cognitive processes human and animal cognitive processes

seem remarkably similarseem remarkably similar

at least in kind, if not in degreeat least in kind, if not in degree

Remember the studies on the Remember the studies on the counter-singing wrens and the counter-singing wrens and the

great tit’s TIgreat tit’s TIAnd, too, most of the studies that And, too, most of the studies that

we’ve seen with dolphins, apes, and we’ve seen with dolphins, apes, and other birdsother birds

Most of the time, when the animals Most of the time, when the animals seemed to fail, it was usually the fault seemed to fail, it was usually the fault

of the experimental design, not the of the experimental design, not the animals’ intelligenceanimals’ intelligence

So, one might suspect that issues So, one might suspect that issues of consciousness would follow of consciousness would follow

along the same lines…along the same lines…

That any difference would be of degree, rather than kind…

But consciousness is a much trickier subject, and experiments are far more

difficult

The field of consciousness continues to be rife with controversy….

Of a type and level only seen before with respect to animal ‘language’

And, of course, some believe that the two fields are connected…

Because language allows communication about the self

Assertions about nonhuman Assertions about nonhuman consciousness range from claims consciousness range from claims ranging from ranging from emergent levels in Cambrian emergent levels in Cambrian organisms (Hameroff, 1997) organisms (Hameroff, 1997)

to levels comparable to humans to levels comparable to humans (Griffin, 1992)(Griffin, 1992)

to denial of the need to study such phenomena (Kennedy, 1992; Blumberg and Wasserman, 1995) at all….

But consciousness studies have become fashionable,

and thus must proceed in as scientific a manner as possible

Though we will see that isn’t a simple matter at all!

The main issues:The main issues: Defining conscious behaviorDefining conscious behavior

Do we gain anything by Do we gain anything by positing positing conscious conscious behavior?behavior?

How How do do we define it? we define it? How is it related to How is it related to

• awareness? awareness? • intentionality? intentionality?

• cognitive ability?cognitive ability?

To examine consciousness, scientists attempt to simplify,

contrast, and isolate its aspects;

for example, it has been studied as working memory

controlled (vs. autonomic) behavior attention (i.e., related to goal selection, vigilance, spatial orientation, or focus)

I propose we look at it as a way of processing information in the

environment….

which has drawbacks because it doesn’t deal directly with describing what one is experience individually

but has advantages with respect to transparency of what is being studied

Two main aspects of Two main aspects of consciousness are generally consciousness are generally

studied: perceptual and reflexive studied: perceptual and reflexive consciousnessconsciousness

Perceptual consciousness is the Perceptual consciousness is the simpler aspect to study…simpler aspect to study…

It simply involves awareness of It simply involves awareness of one’s sensory perceptionsone’s sensory perceptions::

Perceptual consciousness Perceptual consciousness assumes that an organism is assumes that an organism is aware that it is processing aware that it is processing

information, information,

and maybe of the senses being and maybe of the senses being used (e.g., is searching for a used (e.g., is searching for a

particular color or scent, or trying particular color or scent, or trying to label it in some way)to label it in some way)

but is not necessarily aware that it but is not necessarily aware that it is aware of the processis aware of the process

So think of how you know that something is “red” or “green”

Or how you recognize that something is the wrong color….

You don’t necessarily go through the thoughts of “oh, wow, aren’t I

smart that I know that broccoli shouldn’t be orange”

You just process “wrong color”

BUT a critical issue is that perception isn’t consistent across

species…So just because you see something

as “white”, doesn’t mean that a parrot or a bee—that see in

ultraviolet—

Also see it the same way…

And being aware of this fact takes us to the next level..

Thus, reflective consciousness is Thus, reflective consciousness is quite a bit more complicated…quite a bit more complicated…

It does involve awareness of It does involve awareness of one’s thoughts, one’s thoughts,

executive controlexecutive control

and attribution of mental states to and attribution of mental states to others—Theory of Mindothers—Theory of Mind

To determine human consciousness, we often rely on

self-report…

We ask “What were you thinking when you did X?”

But we can’t do this for animals…

Even those with some ‘language’ abilities

So, the goal of this lecture is to So, the goal of this lecture is to

Posit simple stances onPosit simple stances on

brain functionbrain function

in order to provoke debate on the issuesin order to provoke debate on the issues

evolutionary continuityevolutionary continuity

relationships between relationships between cognitive abilities and cognitive abilities and awarenessawareness

Perceptual and reflective Perceptual and reflective consciousness are functions of a consciousness are functions of a

brain’s associative and brain’s associative and representational capacities…representational capacities…

The richer these capacities, the The richer these capacities, the greater the greater the possiblepossible scope of scope of

consciousnessconsciousness

BUT…these capacities—and their BUT…these capacities—and their similarity to those of humans—similarity to those of humans—

do not ensure consciousnessdo not ensure consciousness

only the only the possibilitypossibility of of consciousnessconsciousness

And, species, within their And, species, within their maximum possible level of maximum possible level of

consciousness, consciousness,

exhibit different extents of exhibit different extents of awareness appropriate to the awareness appropriate to the

particular situationparticular situation

Humans, presumably conscious, often Humans, presumably conscious, often act without conscious awareness of act without conscious awareness of the factors controlling their the factors controlling their behavior…behavior…

For example: For example:

If they did not….If they did not….

• a lot of psychiatrists would be a lot of psychiatrists would be out of workout of work

• many ‘automatic’ behavior many ‘automatic’ behavior patterns would not existpatterns would not exist

I start by proposing a separation I start by proposing a separation between ‘awareness’ and between ‘awareness’ and

‘consciousness’‘consciousness’I call complex, higher-order I call complex, higher-order cognitioncognition

‘awareness’ ‘awareness’

and this and this awarenessawareness can be a can be a levellevel of of consciousness (e.g., perceptual consciousness (e.g., perceptual

consciousness)consciousness)

without being isomorphic to ‘full’ without being isomorphic to ‘full’ consciousnessconsciousness

Some precedent for this division exists in the early work of David

Chalmers,

even though he then redefines awareness as

coherent with consciousness…

who is known as one of the kingpins of the recent writings

on consciousness

A caveat:A caveat:

Parallels between studies of Parallels between studies of ‘animal’ consciousness and that of ‘animal’ consciousness and that of ‘animal’ language and ‘animal’ ‘animal’ language and ‘animal’ counting suggestcounting suggest

• care that animals are not excluded care that animals are not excluded simply because they do not match simply because they do not match human abilities exactlyhuman abilities exactly

• care that simpler categories are not care that simpler categories are not overinterpreted so that the fullest overinterpreted so that the fullest level of competence is not missedlevel of competence is not missed

These points are particularly important, because, as we have

seen,

animals are often capable of doing more than we can determine by our relatively primitive means of study

but they also sometimes are incapable of doing tasks at the same

level as humans

If, for example, we say that an animal’s ability to label a few

objects or to request a few objects is “language”

We are then unlikely to examine more complicate aspects of their

cognitive or communicative abilities…

for example, simple grammars, recursion, etc…

To see just how complicated this can be, let’s look at “insight”…the

raven-string studies are an example…

“Insight” is usually considered an entirely unconscious process…

in which an animal is unaware of how current information is being

processed…

Or how multiple sets of information are integrated to achieve a solution

to the posited problem…

But insight must have at least some rudimentary level of awareness…

The individual—human or nonhuman—is clearly aware of the need to

solve the problem

And of the fact that relevant information exists….

In general, researchers studying In general, researchers studying animal cognition assume subjects animal cognition assume subjects

That is, already exhibit some level of That is, already exhibit some level of perceptual awareness….perceptual awareness….

But different levels of awareness are But different levels of awareness are likely necessary for different taskslikely necessary for different tasks

• form representations about form representations about perceived data perceived data

• then process such information….then process such information….

Which in and of itself is important

because it means that if we don’t design the tasks

appropriately—i.e., with enough complexity—

We might not see consciousness that does indeed exist

I therefore posit levels of awareness, I therefore posit levels of awareness, roughly paralleling those of Thomas’ roughly paralleling those of Thomas’ (1980, 1996) hierarchy of cognitive (1980, 1996) hierarchy of cognitive

behaviorbehavior

I then suggest what level of I then suggest what level of awareness appears necessary for awareness appears necessary for

accomplishing each taskaccomplishing each task

The contrast between these levels The contrast between these levels will help us analyze the issuewill help us analyze the issue

Simple associative learning: level 0

A rat presses a lever at the appearance of a specific green block

to get food; no other objects are present and no other responses are

requiredWe aren’t even discussing

match-to-sample or some kind of choice;

this is ‘errorless’ learning

In nature, such behavior likely corresponds to fixed-action

patterns…

Response may be a ‘habit system’

a neural pathway that stores response tendencies but no

representation—no concept of ‘green’, ‘block’, etc.

of the type proposed by Mishkin and his colleagues…

Simple choice of ‘nonmatching’: Simple choice of ‘nonmatching’: Level 1Level 1

Pigeon learns to peck green button Pigeon learns to peck green button when given a red sample and when given a red sample and

red/green choicesred/green choices

As we’ve seen, the pigeon actually As we’ve seen, the pigeon actually doesn’t learn to choose greendoesn’t learn to choose green

but rather learns to avoid redbut rather learns to avoid red

It doesn’t learn ‘greenness’, It doesn’t learn ‘greenness’, ‘redness’‘redness’

But it doesn’t seem But it doesn’t seem awareaware of rule of rule or of following it….or of following it….

because it doesn’t immediately because it doesn’t immediately transfer to new, similar transfer to new, similar

situationssituations

or necessarily realizes that it is even or necessarily realizes that it is even being trained on ‘oddity’, being trained on ‘oddity’,

but to follow a rule…but to follow a rule…

The task is, however, fairly The task is, however, fairly unnatural:unnatural:

For example, to avoid pebbles For example, to avoid pebbles mixed with grain, mixed with grain,

the pigeon would not learn to the pigeon would not learn to recognize pebblesrecognize pebbles

but rather would learn to recognize but rather would learn to recognize graingrain

Evidence for “learning sets”: Level Evidence for “learning sets”: Level 22

The organism, after solving a The organism, after solving a series of discrimination series of discrimination

problems with new object problems with new object pairs, pairs,

acquires a win/stay-lose/shift acquires a win/stay-lose/shift accuracy after ~ 200 accuracy after ~ 200 problemsproblems

i.e., to always choose the striped i.e., to always choose the striped object even if the stripes are different object even if the stripes are different

colors or sizescolors or sizes

This subject has not only acquired a rule….

but also is aware enough that it can transfer the rule across situations with significant savings in time—

Though not enough for immediate transfer to novel

types of stripes

something about stripes leading to food

In nature, such behavior may be In nature, such behavior may be exhibited by some foragers….exhibited by some foragers….

We’ve seen that hummingbirds that We’ve seen that hummingbirds that fully empty a flower’s nectar—i.e., fully empty a flower’s nectar—i.e., win-win-

shift—shift—

quickly transfer across inflorescencesquickly transfer across inflorescences

but do not transfer quickly to win-but do not transfer quickly to win-stay in an operant laboratory settingstay in an operant laboratory setting

Concepts of categories: Level 3Concepts of categories: Level 3

The subject, after learning to sort The subject, after learning to sort specific familiar items into ‘food’ specific familiar items into ‘food’ and ‘not food’ (without sampling)and ‘not food’ (without sampling)

…. ….

Correctly sorts untrained items that Correctly sorts untrained items that it has seen before but that have not it has seen before but that have not

been part of trainingbeen part of training

sorts not only with respect to sorts not only with respect to the category rule, the category rule,

The subjectThe subject

but but remembersremembers previous previous experiences to help sort the new experiences to help sort the new items…. i.e., was this thing edible?items…. i.e., was this thing edible?

that is, can integrate data, that is, can integrate data, and works off of some aware and works off of some aware representation/memoryrepresentation/memory

The integration of information may not be performed

consciously…which is why we can claim only a

level 3

We have no simple way of questioning the animal to determine why it is making the sort the way it

is

but we know the sort is via a concept

Such behavior is likely exhibited by animals that engage in a number of

different foraging strategies….

The subject is not simply responding with respect to color or

shapethat is, with respect to inherent

attributes

Clearly separating out food from nonfood items…

Level 3 is also shown by an animal Level 3 is also shown by an animal that responds, e.g., on the basis of that responds, e.g., on the basis of relative size, for it mustrelative size, for it must

sort based on a rule that involves sort based on a rule that involves no intrinsic properties of an object, no intrinsic properties of an object,

compare items to determine the compare items to determine the answer, andanswer, and

thus integrate two different sets thus integrate two different sets of informationof information

Recursive tasks: Level Recursive tasks: Level 44

Alex, shown a tray of green and blue Alex, shown a tray of green and blue balls and blocks–-a heterogeneous balls and blocks–-a heterogeneous set--responds to “How many blue set--responds to “How many blue

block?”block?”

have representations of the two colors have representations of the two colors and the two objects tied to their and the two objects tied to their labels, labels,

He may be subitizing, not consciously He may be subitizing, not consciously counting, but he IS aware of each of the counting, but he IS aware of each of the

itemsitems

Alex must:Alex must:

and maintain the representation and maintain the representation during the enumerationduring the enumeration

Number used by Alex

Num

ber

of

ob

ject

s1 2 3 4 5 6

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

6

9

7

1

2

1

1

1 1

4

1

1

8

Such behavior is also likely Such behavior is also likely exhibited by countersinging exhibited by countersinging

songbirds in territorial defense…songbirds in territorial defense…

They often act after determiningThey often act after determining

which neighbor is singing, which neighbor is singing,

which song is being sung (that is, which song is being sung (that is, after integrating representations of a after integrating representations of a specific bird and a specific song), andspecific bird and a specific song), and

also choose their response after also choose their response after determining the number of repetitions determining the number of repetitions

of the song….of the song….

Representation of hidden items: Level Representation of hidden items: Level 55

A subject not only solves a complex A subject not only solves a complex Piagetian object permanence task, Piagetian object permanence task,

following where an item is when it is shown to be in the experimenter’s

hand and then is surreptitiously hidden

or tracking an item in a classic “shell game” type of hiding

but also demonstrates knowledge of but also demonstrates knowledge of whatwhat was hidden was hidden

The subject is tricked into believing The subject is tricked into believing “x” is hidden, but finds “y” and “x” is hidden, but finds “y” and

reacts in surprise/angerreacts in surprise/anger

And not just that something of ‘interest’ disappeared….

remember remember item, item,

Subject mustSubject must

track its movement over time and track its movement over time and space, space,

know how to extract the item, know how to extract the item,

and react to the and react to the cognitive cognitive dissonancedissonance

Still, may not be Still, may not be awareaware of the process of the process usedused

The subject is not using something like a ‘go to last place the object

was seen’

or a ‘go to last place the experimenter touched’ rule

Because they’d consistently fail to retrieve the item…

Such a level of awareness is likely Such a level of awareness is likely shown by birds thatshown by birds that

remember not only where they remember not only where they have cached an item, have cached an item,

but when and the specific nature but when and the specific nature of the item cached…of the item cached…

Playing “games”: Playing “games”: Level ?Level ?

Alex, given 7 various items, is Alex, given 7 various items, is asked for the color of the one that, asked for the color of the one that, for example, is wood and for example, is wood and triangular triangular

We’ve seen that when he works at the task, he does very well…

But, on occasion, Alex gives But, on occasion, Alex gives each of the six possible wrong each of the six possible wrong

answers in a row, twice….answers in a row, twice….

Statistically, he can’t be wrong Statistically, he can’t be wrong in that way just by chance…in that way just by chance…

12/12 incorrect trials?

use recursion to decode a symbolic use recursion to decode a symbolic inquiry to determine the designated inquiry to determine the designated attribute of the one item defined by attribute of the one item defined by the conjunction of two other the conjunction of two other attributes, attributes,

In order to respond incorrectly, he must:In order to respond incorrectly, he must:

search for the item, encode its search for the item, encode its attribute, attribute,

then then avoidavoid that label for twelve trials that label for twelve trials

Such behavior indicates at least some level of awareness…

It might not be the same level as an adult human, or even a human

child

But there clearly is some choice involved that is contrary to what might be ‘rationally’ expected

Now, this experiment and the one on object permanence were not designed to study consciousness

However, a simple information-processing model cannot account for

the birds’ behavior patterns….

Will positing some level of consciousness or awareness help?

Let’s go back to the object permanence study and see what we can learn…

We know that Alex and Grif (and probably other birds) had a

representation of what had been hidden….e.g., item A

So when they find B instead of A, why so they react with surprise

instead of continued search?

And they know that A cannot turn into B…

A young child merely stares at A young child merely stares at something that violates something that violates

expectations; expectations;

Is the birds’ behavior logical or Is the birds’ behavior logical or illogical?illogical?

a ‘logical’ computer would react with a ‘logical’ computer would react with an error message and freezean error message and freeze

If we want to continue the computer analogy, we might argue

that

the birds’ anger and surprise are the “error messages” emitted by a

nonhuman

Might, for example, the anger actually represent a short-circuiting of the logical response to continue

searching?

So….what is the bird really So….what is the bird really doing?doing?

Where does this all take Where does this all take us? us?

What benefits do we derive What benefits do we derive from these analyses?from these analyses?

Two possibilitiesTwo possibilities

Testing for awareness leads to Testing for awareness leads to experiments that might otherwise experiments that might otherwise not be performednot be performed

As noted earlier, basic As noted earlier, basic information processing information processing interpretation cannot account for interpretation cannot account for the data, and we look for the data, and we look for something moresomething more

What What isis the logical response? the logical response?

Is it logical or illogical to continue Is it logical or illogical to continue searching when all logic points to searching when all logic points to

the item being in the expected the item being in the expected site?site?

Unclear….but the subject is Unclear….but the subject is showing it showing it isis aware of the aware of the

cognitive dissonance and the cognitive dissonance and the immutability of items….immutability of items….

Such behavior is clearly different from the slow extinguishing of lever pressing in an animal whose

expectations are violated in an operant paradigm….

Remember that it takes sometimes hundreds of trials for the pigeon to shift from, for example, a match-to-

sample to a nonmatch response

For whatever reason, they don’t ‘get’ the need to switch…

But think about humans who continue to press the button of a

vending machine when the expected candy bar does not

appear…“Stupidity is the repetition of the

same act and expecting a different outcome”

And kicking the machine generally doesn’t work, either…

Thus how can we argue for Thus how can we argue for consciousness based on a positive consciousness based on a positive

reaction (‘surprise’)reaction (‘surprise’)

when absent reactions (e.g., from when absent reactions (e.g., from the human who accepts that the the human who accepts that the

vending machine is broken after 2 vending machine is broken after 2 tries and walks away)tries and walks away)

need not denote unconsciousness?need not denote unconsciousness?

Specifically, positing higher-order Specifically, positing higher-order information processing or information processing or

awareness in an individual’s awareness in an individual’s reaction reaction

but not the but not the naturenature of the of the reaction or any explanation reaction or any explanation

of the reactionof the reaction

leads us to expect leads us to expect somesome reaction reaction indicating cognitive dissonance when indicating cognitive dissonance when

such dissonance is appropriate such dissonance is appropriate

If, however, consciousness is indeed If, however, consciousness is indeed defined—as some would—as thedefined—as some would—as the

Then might our birds be Then might our birds be conscious?conscious?

existence of “…noncomputable, existence of “…noncomputable, seemingly random, conscious seemingly random, conscious

choices with an element of choices with an element of unpredictabiltiy…” (Hameroff, 1998; unpredictabiltiy…” (Hameroff, 1998;

also Barinaga, 1996; also Barinaga, 1996;

We could try to argue instead for some kind of ‘proto-consciousness’

We could then argue that the birds’ acts of anger and surprise but lack

of continued search

are indicative of an intermediate stage in consciousness…

And although the places where one would draw lines are arbitrary….

But if we posit consciousness But if we posit consciousness of any level or any sort based of any level or any sort based

on such dataon such data

That is basically where I am heading

we are led twe are led to a surprising a surprising conclusion…conclusion…

A subject thus appears most A subject thus appears most conscious when normal cognitive conscious when normal cognitive

processes failprocesses fail

But this ‘something else’ may be a But this ‘something else’ may be a simple emotional state, simple emotional state,

and it must access ‘something and it must access ‘something else’ to decide how to else’ to decide how to

proceed…proceed…

without any logic or processing….without any logic or processing….

Again, where are we?

Have we merely circled back to Mishkin’s ‘habit state’

In which responses are made reflexively, without any real choice

or need for knowledge?

Well, let’s go back to the “game-Well, let’s go back to the “game-playing” in the Level 5 ‘recursive’ task playing” in the Level 5 ‘recursive’ task

in which Alex give the 12 wrong in which Alex give the 12 wrong answers in a row (when I let him)….answers in a row (when I let him)….

The correct answer is logical and would The correct answer is logical and would get him the object as a reward or the get him the object as a reward or the right to ask for whatever he wants….right to ask for whatever he wants….

but he chooses to respond in an but he chooses to respond in an intentionally illogical manner….intentionally illogical manner….

Might an organism be conscious if: Might an organism be conscious if:

it knows why it should/might it knows why it should/might respond in a given way, respond in a given way,

but opts to respond differently, but opts to respond differently, eithereither

to avoid the consequences, orto avoid the consequences, or

intentionally elicit some more intentionally elicit some more interesting behavior pattern interesting behavior pattern

from others in its environment?from others in its environment?

Another example, involving Another example, involving numerical competence….Let’s numerical competence….Let’s

review one of my studies from the review one of my studies from the standpoint of possible standpoint of possible

consciousness..consciousness..During a study of number During a study of number

comprehension, my parrot is comprehension, my parrot is presented with trays consisting of presented with trays consisting of x objects of one color, y objects of x objects of one color, y objects of a second color, and z objects of a a second color, and z objects of a

third colorthird color

He is asked “What color z?”He is asked “What color z?”

which is again a task requiring that which is again a task requiring that he have a symbolic representation he have a symbolic representation of the number z and the various of the number z and the various color labelscolor labels

He responds accurately on a He responds accurately on a dozen or so trials, demonstrating dozen or so trials, demonstrating

that he understands the taskthat he understands the task

Number Alex comprehends

Num

ber

of

ob

ject

s1 2 3 4 5 6 n m

1

2

3

4

5

6

8

9

10

8

8

1

1

1

10

1

1 1

2

none 5 1

He is then given a tray with 2 blue He is then given a tray with 2 blue blocks, 3 purple blocks, 6 orange blocks, 3 purple blocks, 6 orange blocks and asked “What color 3?”blocks and asked “What color 3?”

He responds by saying He responds by saying “five”“five”

Despite several requests from me Despite several requests from me to answer “What color 3?”, he to answer “What color 3?”, he insists on responding “five”….insists on responding “five”….

He clearly is not getting rewarded for this behavior in the traditional

manner….

I finally asks “What color 5?”…..

To which Alex responds “none”

He’s getting neither a toy nor a treat, only watching me get more

exasperated

Remember, Alex had been trained Remember, Alex had been trained to respond “none” when shown two to respond “none” when shown two

objects and queried “What’s objects and queried “What’s same/different?” if nothing were same/different?” if nothing were

same or different…same or different…

He had spontaneously transferred He had spontaneously transferred use of “none” to a task on relative use of “none” to a task on relative

size when two objects did not size when two objects did not differ in size….differ in size….

But now he had not only But now he had not only spontaneously transferred to spontaneously transferred to

using “none” to designate using “none” to designate absence of *objects* rather than absence of *objects* rather than

attributes…..attributes…..

But had also been the one to initiate But had also been the one to initiate such trialssuch trials

Was he consciously manipulating Was he consciously manipulating the experimental situation?the experimental situation?

If so, was his motivation similar to If so, was his motivation similar to his consistently providing his consistently providing

incorrect answers….incorrect answers….

That is, to obtain some specific That is, to obtain some specific behavior from his trainer?behavior from his trainer?

Are we approaching some level of “theory of mind”?

Has he learned by association what will annoy me or is there something

more complex at work?

Does he specifically want to annoy me because that is more

interesting than any other reward?

Do we need to start examining comparative neurological capacities to

determine what is happening?

Has he learned how to manipulate me for his own ends?

Does such behavior imply awareness at levels comparable to

that of human children?

Koch (2004) argues that Koch (2004) argues that

Consciousness becomes an executive Consciousness becomes an executive decision by frontal areas of the decision by frontal areas of the brain…brain…

thus arguing that the brain’s thus arguing that the brain’s ability to select particular events ability to select particular events for processing--i.e., attention--for processing--i.e., attention--

has a major role in structuring has a major role in structuring human consciousnesshuman consciousness

And, as we’ve discussed, recent And, as we’ve discussed, recent studies of the avian brain (e.g., studies of the avian brain (e.g.,

Javis and Mello, 2000; Jarvis et al. Javis and Mello, 2000; Jarvis et al. 2005 ) posit2005 ) posit

that areas once thought to be that areas once thought to be striatal and thus evolved from striatal and thus evolved from different areas than those that different areas than those that developed into human cortexdeveloped into human cortex

are pallial and thus actually derived are pallial and thus actually derived from the same areas…from the same areas…

I thus posit that I thus posit that

evolutionary evolutionary homologies/convergences across taxa homologies/convergences across taxa in brain function that lead to in brain function that lead to continuity (but not necessarily continuity (but not necessarily isomorphism) in cognitive processing isomorphism) in cognitive processing also also allow forallow for (but do (but do notnot necessarily necessarily lead to)lead to) convergence (but not necessarily convergence (but not necessarily isomorphism) with respect to isomorphism) with respect to consciousnessconsciousness

A tentative conclusion:A tentative conclusion:

Positing full consciousness is unlikely Positing full consciousness is unlikely to assist studies of logical, cognitive to assist studies of logical, cognitive processing…. processing….

What we have defined as What we have defined as awarenessawareness will be responsible for will be responsible for such behavior…such behavior…

But positing full consciousness will But positing full consciousness will likely assist in examininglikely assist in examining

subjectivesubjective—emotional——emotional—aspects aspects

and the boundary between and the boundary between objective and subjective objective and subjective aspectsaspects

Superficial forays into the realm of Superficial forays into the realm of consciousness are likely to provide consciousness are likely to provide little solid information…little solid information…

But, depending on the But, depending on the focusfocus of the of the study, study,

I suggest:I suggest:

intriguing information can be intriguing information can be obtained about behavior patterns obtained about behavior patterns that cannot be explained through that cannot be explained through

traditional paradigmstraditional paradigms

Now, the person who really started the modern interest in animal consciousness was Don Griffin

And I’ve covered a few of his ideas already…

His main argument was that the continuity of animal-human ability in

many other areas argued for a continuity in consciousness

In his books he gives numerous examples of cognitive processes in animals that were, at the time he

wrote, truly unexpected

Material he dug out of old papers, such as von Frisch stating that bees seemed to learn to anticipate where

the experimenter would place feeders in a study that had feeders extending further and further afield each day…

He argued that communication was a “window on animal minds”

And forced researchers to re-analyze their data so as to look for various

types of behavior that might provide evidence for consciousness…

Or at least higher levels of awareness

One of the big issues has been the search for the “NCC”….the neural

correlate of consciousness…

Some brain center that can be identified in humans

And for which we can then search in animals….

So far, no luck…

And, of course the neural issue gets muddled by things like

“blindsight”Weisenkrantz has show that when

specific bits of the brain in the visual cortex are destroyed,

humans claim that they can’t see anything

but are correct if asked to guess about what might be in front of them

So they are not consciously aware of something

But other bits of their brain are able to produce correct responses…

Is something like that what is happening in nonhumans, to give

them the appearance of consciousness at times?

And, to get back to the emotional state issues,

Researchers like Damasio argue that consciousness requires the existence

of feelings….

That is, that core consciousness is how it feels to be oneself at a particular

time and place…

And then argues for an ‘extended’ consciousness to deal w/ future and

past

and that core versus extended consciousness is how humans differ

from nonhumans…

And others, like Edelman, present related ideas about levels of

consciousness

Another way of getting at consciousness is seeing whether an individual—human or nonhuman—

knows what it knows…

An ingenious test w/ monkeys at least suggested that the animals

might report such abilities….

The monkeys see

Have a delay that differs on each trial

And then can choose between two buttons, R and L

The right R button starts a trial and asks if they have, for example,

seen

If they have, they touch it and receive a favorite food;

But touching the wrong pattern produces no food and a long delay

Now, if they touch the left L button

they just get a less preferred food

Interestingly, when the delays were long,

one of the two monkeys tested always chose to take the less-preferred food than to take a

chance of erring

but on short delays, opted to take the test

Such data suggested that the monkeys might be aware of what it

was that they remembered

We can also re-examine Betty the tool-making crow from the

level of consciousness…

In the wild, these crows make tools by breaking off pieces of twigs so

that what remains is a hook..

They don’t bend the twigs and they surely have no experience with

metal

Thus Griffin argues that Betty was aware of exactly what she needed

for the task

And consciously figured out what might give her what she needed

And how to get it done

So, the bottom line is that we really don’t quite know how

to define consciousness

in animals or humans….

But we can understand why it is important to do so and to search for

it