Replication of the mirror mark test experiment in the magpie (Pica pica) does not provide evidence of self-recognition.

2020 ◽  
Vol 134 (4) ◽  
pp. 363-371 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manuel Soler ◽  
José Manuel Colmenero ◽  
Tomás Pérez-Contreras ◽  
Juan Manuel Peralta-Sánchez
2019 ◽  
Vol 161 (2) ◽  
pp. 341-350 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amaan Buniyaadi ◽  
S. K. Tahajjul Taufique ◽  
Vinod Kumar
Keyword(s):  

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Masanori Kohda ◽  
Takashi Hotta ◽  
Tomohiro Takeyama ◽  
Satoshi Awata ◽  
Hirokazu Tanaka ◽  
...  

AbstractThe ability to perceive and recognise a reflected mirror image as self (mirror self-recognition, MSR) is considered a hallmark of cognition across species. Although MSR has been reported in mammals and birds, it is not known to occur in any other major taxon. A factor potentially limiting the ability to test for MSR is that the established assay for MSR, the mark test, shows an interpretation bias towards animals with the dexterity (or limbs) required to touch a mark. Here, we show that the cleaner wrasse fish, Labroides dimidiatus, passes through all phases of the mark test: (i) social reactions towards the reflection, (ii) repeated idiosyncratic behaviours towards the mirror (contingency testing), and (iii) frequent observation of their reflection. When subsequently provided with a coloured tag, individuals attempt to remove the mark in the presence of a mirror but show no response towards transparent marks, or to coloured marks in the absence of a mirror. This remarkable finding presents a challenge to our interpretation of the mark test – do we accept that these behavioural responses in the mark test, which are taken as evidence of self-recognition in other species, mean that fish are self-aware? Or do we conclude that these behavioural patterns have a basis in a cognitive process other than self-recognition? If the former, what does this mean for our understanding of animal intelligence? If the latter, what does this mean for our application and interpretation of the mark test as a metric for animal cognitive abilities?


1997 ◽  
Vol 84 (2) ◽  
pp. 355-370 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ethel Tobach ◽  
Alexander J. Skolnick ◽  
Isobel Klein ◽  
Gary Greenberg

Reports on self-recognition in great apes have been mostly derived from experimental studies of mirror behavior (mark test) requiring anesthetization of the animals. We investigated a relatively noninvasive technique to study this behavior. In two experiments with a group of captive orangutans (1 adult male, 3 adult females, 1 juvenile male, and 1 juvenile female), we presented combinations of blank posters, life-size portraits of each individual in the group, a mirror, and videos. Durations of viewing and patterns of viewing were recorded. The prominent features of the viewing were the differences among the individuals in frequency, duration, and pattern of viewing. Some evidence of mirror-based self-referent behavior (behavior in which the activity of the animal with its body was related to the activity of the image in the mirror) was seen in the juvenile female, but more was seen in one adult female. This adult female spent the most time viewing the mirror and was the only animal to view her own portrait more than the other portraits in one session. In addition, she moved from one portrait to another, and back to the first, and to her own portrait and the mirror in a pattern resembling comparison of the two portraits as well as of her portrait and her mirror image. It is suggested that data based on self-referent behavior of the same animal during self-viewing in a mirror and during viewing of its self-portrait and on behavior observed in the mark test are worth further investigation.


2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lindsay E. Murray ◽  
James R. Anderson ◽  
Gordon G. Gallup

AbstractMirror self-recognition (MSR), widely regarded as an indicator of self-awareness, has not been demonstrated consistently in gorillas. We aimed to examine this issue by setting out a method to evaluate gorilla self-recognition studies that is objective, quantifiable, and easy to replicate. Using Suarez and Gallup’s (J Hum Evol 10:175–183, 1981) study as a reference point, we drew up a list of 15 methodological criteria and assigned scores to all published studies of gorilla MSR for both methodology and outcomes. Key features of studies finding both mark-directed and spontaneous self-directed responses included visually inaccessible marks, controls for tactile and olfactory cues, subjects who were at least 5 years old, and clearly distinguishing between responses in front of versus away from the mirror. Additional important criteria include videotaping the tests, having more than one subject, subjects with adequate social rearing, reporting post-marking observations with mirror absent, and giving mirror exposure in a social versus individual setting. Our prediction that MSR studies would obtain progressively higher scores as procedures and behavioural coding practices improved over time was supported for methods, but not for outcomes. These findings illustrate that methodological rigour does not guarantee stronger evidence of self-recognition in gorillas; methodological differences alone do not explain the inconsistent evidence for MSR in gorillas. By implication, it might be suggested that, in general, gorillas do not show compelling evidence of MSR. We advocate that future MSR studies incorporate the same criteria to optimize the quality of attempts to clarify the self-recognition abilities of gorillas as well as other species.


PLoS Biology ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 6 (8) ◽  
pp. e202 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helmut Prior ◽  
Ariane Schwarz ◽  
Onur Güntürkün
Keyword(s):  

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pooja Parishar ◽  
Alok Nath Mohapatra ◽  
Soumya Iyengar

Earlier evidence suggests that besides humans, some species of mammals and birds demonstrate visual self-recognition, assessed by the controversial “mark” test. Whereas, there are high levels of inter-individual differences amongst a single species, some species such as macaques and pigeons which do not spontaneously demonstrate mirror self-recognition (MSR) can be trained to do so. We were surprised to discover that despite being widely used as a model system for avian research, the performance of zebra finches (Taenopygia guttata) on the mark test had not been studied earlier. Additionally, we studied the behavioral responses of another species of passerine songbirds (Indian house crows; Corvus splendens) to a mirror and the MSR mark test. Although a small number of adult male zebra finches appeared to display heightened responses toward the mark while observing their reflections, we could not rule out the possibility that these were a part of general grooming rather than specific to the mark. Furthermore, none of the house crows demonstrated mark-directed behavior or increased self-exploratory behaviors when facing mirrors. Our study suggests that self-directed behaviors need to be tested more rigorously in adult male zebra finches while facing their reflections and these findings need to be replicated in a larger population, given the high degree of variability in mirror-directed behaviors.


Behaviour ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 156 (5-8) ◽  
pp. 763-786 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. van Buuren ◽  
A. Auersperg ◽  
G. Gajdon ◽  
S. Tebbich ◽  
A. von Bayern

Abstract So far only one bird species, a corvid, passed the mark test for mirror self-recognition (MSR) although the results have been questioned. We examined the capacity for MSR in another large-brained avian taxon, parrots, with keas (Nestor notabilis) and Goffin’s cockatoos (Cacatua goffini). After several weeks of mirror habituation, they were subjected to the mark test using different marks and mark placements while facing horizontal and vertical mirrors simultaneously. The keas had an additional control condition in which their reaction towards a marked or non-marked conspecific behind a transparent partition was compared to their own reflection. No evidence of MSR was found in either species. Keas responded to their reflection comparably to a conspecific behind a clear separation. Goffin’s cockatoos showed fewer social responses towards their horizontal reflection compared to their vertical reflection, suggesting that they may interpret them differently.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document