Theory of Animal Mind: Human Nature or Experimental Artefact?

Caroline E Spence; Magda Osman; Alan G McElligott

doi:10.1016/j.tics.2017.02.003

Theory of Animal Mind: Human Nature or Experimental Artefact?

Caroline E Spence, Magda Osman, Alan G McElligott

Research output: Contribution to journal › Review article › peer-review

636 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Are animals capable of empathy, problem-solving, or even self-recognition? Much research is dedicated to answering these questions and yet few studies have considered how humans form beliefs about animal minds. Evidence suggests that our mentalising of animals is a natural consequence of Theory of Mind (ToM) capabilities. However, where beliefs regarding animal mind have been investigated, there has been slow progress in establishing the mechanism underpinning how this is achieved. Here, we consider what conclusions can be drawn regarding how people theorise about animal minds and the different conceptual and methodological issues that might limit the accuracy of conclusions currently drawn from this work. We suggest a new empirical framework for better capturing the human theory of animal mind, which in turn has significant political and social implications.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	333-343
Journal	Trends in cognitive sciences
Volume	21
Issue number	5
Early online date	27 Mar 2017
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2017.02.003
Publication status	Published - 1 May 2017

Keywords

Journal Article
Review

Access to Document

10.1016/j.tics.2017.02.003

Theory of Animal MindAccepted author manuscript, 1.21 MB

http://qmro.qmul.ac.uk/xmlui/handle/123456789/19558

Alan G McElligott
- School of Life and Health Sciences - Honorary Research Fellow
- Centre for Integrated Research in Life and Health Sciences
Person

Using comparative cognition to advance positive animal welfare
McElligott, A. G. (Speaker)
15 Nov 2019
Activity: Public engagement and outreach › Public speaking engagements
Using Comparative Cognition to Advance Positive Animal Welfare
McElligott, A. G. (Speaker)
21 Nov 2019
Activity: Public engagement and outreach › Public speaking engagements

Cite this

@article{f7487ecc86264eda8ee5d58bddf21244,

title = "Theory of Animal Mind: Human Nature or Experimental Artefact?",

abstract = "Are animals capable of empathy, problem-solving, or even self-recognition? Much research is dedicated to answering these questions and yet few studies have considered how humans form beliefs about animal minds. Evidence suggests that our mentalising of animals is a natural consequence of Theory of Mind (ToM) capabilities. However, where beliefs regarding animal mind have been investigated, there has been slow progress in establishing the mechanism underpinning how this is achieved. Here, we consider what conclusions can be drawn regarding how people theorise about animal minds and the different conceptual and methodological issues that might limit the accuracy of conclusions currently drawn from this work. We suggest a new empirical framework for better capturing the human theory of animal mind, which in turn has significant political and social implications.",

keywords = "Journal Article, Review",

author = "Spence, {Caroline E} and Magda Osman and McElligott, {Alan G}",

year = "2017",

month = may,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1016/j.tics.2017.02.003",

language = "English",

volume = "21",

pages = "333--343",

journal = "Trends in cognitive sciences",

issn = "1364-6613",

publisher = "Elsevier",

number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Theory of Animal Mind

T2 - Human Nature or Experimental Artefact?

AU - Spence, Caroline E

AU - Osman, Magda

AU - McElligott, Alan G

PY - 2017/5/1

Y1 - 2017/5/1

N2 - Are animals capable of empathy, problem-solving, or even self-recognition? Much research is dedicated to answering these questions and yet few studies have considered how humans form beliefs about animal minds. Evidence suggests that our mentalising of animals is a natural consequence of Theory of Mind (ToM) capabilities. However, where beliefs regarding animal mind have been investigated, there has been slow progress in establishing the mechanism underpinning how this is achieved. Here, we consider what conclusions can be drawn regarding how people theorise about animal minds and the different conceptual and methodological issues that might limit the accuracy of conclusions currently drawn from this work. We suggest a new empirical framework for better capturing the human theory of animal mind, which in turn has significant political and social implications.

AB - Are animals capable of empathy, problem-solving, or even self-recognition? Much research is dedicated to answering these questions and yet few studies have considered how humans form beliefs about animal minds. Evidence suggests that our mentalising of animals is a natural consequence of Theory of Mind (ToM) capabilities. However, where beliefs regarding animal mind have been investigated, there has been slow progress in establishing the mechanism underpinning how this is achieved. Here, we consider what conclusions can be drawn regarding how people theorise about animal minds and the different conceptual and methodological issues that might limit the accuracy of conclusions currently drawn from this work. We suggest a new empirical framework for better capturing the human theory of animal mind, which in turn has significant political and social implications.

KW - Journal Article

KW - Review

U2 - 10.1016/j.tics.2017.02.003

DO - 10.1016/j.tics.2017.02.003

M3 - Review article

C2 - 28347613

SN - 1364-6613

VL - 21

SP - 333

EP - 343

JO - Trends in cognitive sciences

JF - Trends in cognitive sciences

IS - 5

ER -

Theory of Animal Mind: Human Nature or Experimental Artefact?

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Profiles

Alan G McElligott

Activities

Using comparative cognition to advance positive animal welfare

Using Comparative Cognition to Advance Positive Animal Welfare

Cite this