Evidence for a general cognitive structure in pigeons (Columba livia)
Abstract A well replicated result in humans is that performance, whether good or bad, is consistent across a wide variety of cognitive tasks. Factor analysis extracts one factor that can account for approximately half of the variance in performance. This factor is termed g and almost all cognitive t...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Springer
2024-11-01
|
| Series: | Animal Cognition |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-024-01912-3 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1832585512326529024 |
|---|---|
| author | Mary Flaim Aaron P. Blaisdell |
| author_facet | Mary Flaim Aaron P. Blaisdell |
| author_sort | Mary Flaim |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract A well replicated result in humans is that performance, whether good or bad, is consistent across a wide variety of cognitive tasks. Factor analysis extracts one factor that can account for approximately half of the variance in performance. This factor is termed g and almost all cognitive tasks positively load onto this factor. While some neurobiological correlates of g have been identified in humans, causal experiments are only feasible in animals. When mice and some avian species are assessed with cognitive test batteries, performance positively correlates, and the first component extracted has similar properties to g. There are some limitations to the species tested thus far, including comparability in the cognitive domains assessed. The pigeon is an ideal subject to overcome these issues since pigeons, humans, and other primates are frequently given similar tasks and many neural correlates of performance have been identified in the pigeon. We created a test battery that assessed different domains, including associative learning, memory, cognitive flexibility, and reaction time. When all tasks were included, there was evidence for a two-component structure that was influenced by subjects’ age. When the reaction time task was excluded, there was a g-like component. The implications for these results when constructing future test batteries and comparing across species are discussed. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-9ed985d0760c43ae8fea47cc6661699e |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 1435-9456 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2024-11-01 |
| publisher | Springer |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Animal Cognition |
| spelling | doaj-art-9ed985d0760c43ae8fea47cc6661699e2025-01-26T12:43:52ZengSpringerAnimal Cognition1435-94562024-11-0127111610.1007/s10071-024-01912-3Evidence for a general cognitive structure in pigeons (Columba livia)Mary Flaim0Aaron P. Blaisdell1Ruhr-Universität BochumUniversity of California – Los AngelesAbstract A well replicated result in humans is that performance, whether good or bad, is consistent across a wide variety of cognitive tasks. Factor analysis extracts one factor that can account for approximately half of the variance in performance. This factor is termed g and almost all cognitive tasks positively load onto this factor. While some neurobiological correlates of g have been identified in humans, causal experiments are only feasible in animals. When mice and some avian species are assessed with cognitive test batteries, performance positively correlates, and the first component extracted has similar properties to g. There are some limitations to the species tested thus far, including comparability in the cognitive domains assessed. The pigeon is an ideal subject to overcome these issues since pigeons, humans, and other primates are frequently given similar tasks and many neural correlates of performance have been identified in the pigeon. We created a test battery that assessed different domains, including associative learning, memory, cognitive flexibility, and reaction time. When all tasks were included, there was evidence for a two-component structure that was influenced by subjects’ age. When the reaction time task was excluded, there was a g-like component. The implications for these results when constructing future test batteries and comparing across species are discussed.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-024-01912-3IntelligenceTest batteryPigeonG factor |
| spellingShingle | Mary Flaim Aaron P. Blaisdell Evidence for a general cognitive structure in pigeons (Columba livia) Animal Cognition Intelligence Test battery Pigeon G factor |
| title | Evidence for a general cognitive structure in pigeons (Columba livia) |
| title_full | Evidence for a general cognitive structure in pigeons (Columba livia) |
| title_fullStr | Evidence for a general cognitive structure in pigeons (Columba livia) |
| title_full_unstemmed | Evidence for a general cognitive structure in pigeons (Columba livia) |
| title_short | Evidence for a general cognitive structure in pigeons (Columba livia) |
| title_sort | evidence for a general cognitive structure in pigeons columba livia |
| topic | Intelligence Test battery Pigeon G factor |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-024-01912-3 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT maryflaim evidenceforageneralcognitivestructureinpigeonscolumbalivia AT aaronpblaisdell evidenceforageneralcognitivestructureinpigeonscolumbalivia |