How smart are animals? Are some of the organisms that we call ‘dumb animals’ actually capable of complex cognitive skills?
The trick is to figure how a test that will determine the difference between a memorized response and actual cognitive skills. This is a task that I actually have to deal with. Can I write a test question such that there isn’t a canned response? What evidence will be presented by the tester to determine that they actually have a particular piece of knowledge or a skill?
For example let’s say I ask this question.
How many oxygen molecules are released by the photosynthesis reaction that generates one glucose molecule?
CO2 + H2O –> O2 + C6H12O6
A student could balance the equation and get the right answer. Because this is such a common reaction used in schools, another student may have just memorized the right answer.
By asking the question this way, I really don’t know if they have the skill of balancing a complex chemical equation or if they know about photosynthesis. This is a poor question.
If I want to know if they know anything about photosynthesis, then I should eliminate the equation. If I want to know if the student can balance an equation, then I need to present something that is unlikely to have been used in their chemistry class.
It’s even worse when examining the intelligence of animals. They (in general) can’t talk to us. They can’t explain what they are thinking when they do something… of course, if they could explain it, then that would show intelligence and this would be a moot point.
This video from Nova shows how scientists are figuring out the difference between rote memorization and true cognitive ability. The whole series is quite excellent and I’ll just hit some highlights.
Chaser is a border collie, a breed well known for herding sheep. Chaser’s herd is a pile of a thousand stuffed animals. According to her owner, a psychology professor, she knows the name of every single one of them.
Neil Degrasse Tyson tested Chaser by randomly selected 9 stuffed animals and then asking Chaser to get them. Eighteen trials later, Chaser hadn’t made any mistakes. So Tyson put a stuffed animal (a Darwin doll) in the mix. Chaser had never seen it before and had never heard the name “Darwin” before either.
When Chaser heard the command “Find Darwin”, she went to the pile, but seemed confused. Tyson repeated the command and Chaser returned with the Darwin doll.
The dog had inferred that an unknown name corresponded with an unknown doll.
A scientist in the Caribbean is doing some research with dolphins. She has trained them to place a weight in a bucket. When enough weights are in the bucket a fish will fall out of a door. The dolphins quickly figured out that they could pick up several weights at once, instead of one at a time.
In another test, dolphins are taught to ‘create’. They have to create a new trick, one that they haven’t done before. Then the trainers give the command “together” and “create” to a pair of dolphins.
The dolphins dive and underwater microphones record the sounds. The dolphins are communicating. Both rise to the surface simultaneously, roll over onto their backs, and lift their tails.
How could they coordinate something like that without complex communication?
So yes, it is possible to craft a test that can determine cognitive ability rather than rote memorization. It’s not easy, but it can be done. And the results are quite interesting.
