On the Origins of Mind: A Comparative Perspective

Literature Cited

1. Acredolo L. 1988. From signal to symbol: the development of landmark knowledge from 9 to 13 months. Br. J. Dev. Psychol. 6:369–72
   [Google Scholar]
2. Adachi I. 2014. Spontaneous spatial mapping of learned sequence in chimpanzees: evidence for a SNARC-like effect. PLOS ONE 9:3e90373
   [Google Scholar]
3. Albiach-Serrano A, Guillén-Salazar F, Call J. 2007. Mangabeys (Cercocebus torquatus lunulatus) solve the reverse contingency task without a modified procedure. Anim. Cogn. 10:387–96
   [Google Scholar]
4. Anderson JR, Hattori Y, Fujita K. 2008. Quality before quantity: rapid learning of reverse reward contingency by capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella). J. Comp. Psychol. 122:445–48
   [Google Scholar]
5. Apperly I, Butterfill SA. 2009. Do humans have two systems to track beliefs and belief-like states?. Psychol. Rev. 116:4953–70
   [Google Scholar]
6. Beck J 2018. Do nonhuman animals have a language of thought?. The Routledge Handbook of Philosophy of Animal Minds K Andrews, J Beck 46–55 New York: Routledge
   [Google Scholar]
7. Bonatti L, Frot E, Zangl R, Mehler J. 2002. The human first hypothesis: identification of conspecifics and individuation of objects in the young infant. Cogn. Psychol. 44:4388–426
   [Google Scholar]
8. Bonatti LL, Frot E, Mehler J. 2005. What face inversion does to infants’ counting abilities. Psychol. Sci. 16:7506–10
   [Google Scholar]
9. Boyle A. 2019. Mapping the minds of others. Rev. Philos. Psychol. 10:4747–67
   [Google Scholar]
10. Boysen ST, Berntson GG. 1995. Responses to quantity: perceptual versus cognitive mechanisms in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). J. Exp. Psychol. Anim. Behav. Process. 21:82–86
    [Google Scholar]
11. Boysen ST, Berntson GG, Hannan MB, Cacioppo JT 1996. Quantity-based interference and symbolic representations in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). J. Exp. Psychol. Anim. Behav. Process. 22:76–86
    [Google Scholar]
12. Boysen ST, Mukobi KL, Berntson GG. 1999. Overcoming response bias using symbolic representations of number by chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). Anim. Learn. Behav. 27:2229–35
    [Google Scholar]
13. Bräuer J, Call J. 2011. The magic cup: great apes and domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) individuate objects according to their properties. J. Comp. Psychol. 125:3353–61
    [Google Scholar]
14. Buttelmann D, Buttelmann F, Carpenter M, Call J, Tomasello M. 2017. Great apes distinguish true from false beliefs in an interactive helping task. PLOS ONE 12:4e0173793
    [Google Scholar]
15. Butterfill SA, Apperly I. 2013. How to construct a minimal theory of mind. Mind Lang 28:5606–37
    [Google Scholar]
16. Cacchione T, Hrubesch C, Call J, Rakoczy H. 2016. Are apes essentialists? Scope and limits of psychological essentialism in great apes. Anim. Cogn. 19:5921–37
    [Google Scholar]
17. Call J. 2004. Inferences about the location of food in the great apes (Panpaniscus, Pan troglodytes, Gorilla gorilla, and Pongo pygmaeus). J. Comp. Psychol. 118:2232–41
    [Google Scholar]
18. Call J. 2006. Descartes’ two errors: reason and reflection in the great apes. Rational Animals? S Hurley, M Nudds 219–34 Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
19. Call J. 2011. How artificial communication affects the communication and cognition of the great apes. Mind Lang 26:11–20
    [Google Scholar]
20. Call J. 2022. The “avoid the empty cup” hypothesis does not explain great apes’ (Gorilla gorilla, Pan paniscus, Pan troglodytes, Pongo abelii) responses in two three-cup one-item inference by exclusion tasks. J. Comp. Psychol. 136:3172–88
    [Google Scholar]
21. Call J, Tomasello M. 1999. A nonverbal false belief task: the performance of children and great apes. Child Dev. 70:2381–95
    [Google Scholar]
22. Camp E. 2007. Thinking with maps. Philos. Perspect. 21:1145–82
    [Google Scholar]
23. Carruthers P. 2002. Modularity, language, and the flexibility of thought. Behav. Brain Sci. 25:6705–19
    [Google Scholar]
24. Cartwright BA, Collett TS. 1982. How honey bees use landmarks to guide their return to a food source. Nature 295:560–64
    [Google Scholar]
25. Cheng K. 1986. A purely geometric module in the rat's spatial representation. Cognition 23:2149–78
    [Google Scholar]
26. Cheng K, Huttenlocher J, Newcombe NS. 2013. 25 years of research on the use of geometry in spatial reorientation: a current theoretical perspective. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 20:61033–54
    [Google Scholar]
27. Cheng K, Spetch ML 1998. Mechanisms of landmark use in mammals and birds. Spatial Representation in Animals SA Healy 1–17 Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
28. Christie S, Gentner D. 2014. Language helps children succeed on a classic analogy task. Cogn. Sci. 38:2383–97
    [Google Scholar]
29. Christie S, Gentner D, Call J, Haun DBM. 2016. Sensitivity to relational similarity and object similarity in apes and children. Curr. Biol. 26:4531–35
    [Google Scholar]
30. Cook M, Mineka S. 1990. Selective associations in the observational conditioning of fear in rhesus monkeys. J. Exp. Psychol. Anim. Behav. Process. 16:4372–89
    [Google Scholar]
31. Dehaene S, Changeux J-P. 1993. Development of elementary numerical abilities: a neuronal model. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 5:4390–407
    [Google Scholar]
32. Dennett DC. 1978. Beliefs about beliefs [P&W, SR&B]. Behav. Brain Sci. 1:4568–70
    [Google Scholar]
33. Dewar K, Xu F. 2007. Do 9-month-old infants expect distinct words to refer to kinds?. Dev. Psychol. 43:51227–38
    [Google Scholar]
34. Domjan M, Cusato B, Krause M. 2004. Learning with arbitrary versus ecological conditioned stimuli: evidence from sexual conditioning. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 11:2232–46
    [Google Scholar]
35. Eckert J, Rakoczy H, Duguid S, Herrmann E, Call J 2021. The ape lottery: Chimpanzees fail to consider spatial information when drawing statistical inferences. Anim. Behav. Cogn. 8:3305–24
    [Google Scholar]
36. Fabricius WV, Boyer TW, Weimer AA, Carroll K 2010. True or false: Do 5-year-olds understand belief?. Dev. Psychol. 46:61402–16
    [Google Scholar]
37. Fagot J, Parron C. 2010. Relational matching in baboons (Papio papio) with reduced grouping requirements. J. Exp. Psychol. Anim. Behav. Process. 36:2184–93
    [Google Scholar]
38. Fagot J, Thompson RKR. 2011. Generalized relational matching by Guinea baboons (Papio papio) in two-by-two-item analogy problems. Psychol. Sci. 22:101304–9
    [Google Scholar]
39. Ferrigno S, Huang Y, Cantlon JF. 2021. Reasoning through the disjunctive syllogism in monkeys. Psychol Sci 32:2292–300
    [Google Scholar]
40. Flombaum JI, Santos LR. 2005. Rhesus monkeys attribute perceptions to others. Curr. Biol. 15:5447–52
    [Google Scholar]
41. Fodor JA. 1975. The Language of Thought Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
42. Fodor JA. 1983. The Modularity of Mind Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
43. Fodor JA. 2000. The Mind Doesn't Work That Way: The Scope and Limits of Computational Psychology Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
44. Fodor JA, Pylyshyn ZW. 1988. Connectionism and cognitive architecture: a critical analysis. Cognition 28:13–71
    [Google Scholar]
45. Garcia J, Koelling RA. 1966. Relation of cue to consequence in avoidance learning. Psychon. Sci. 4:3123–24
    [Google Scholar]
46. Gentner D 2003. Why we're so smart. Language in Mind: Advances in the Study of Language and Thought D Gentner, S Goldin-Meadow 195–235 Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
    [Google Scholar]
47. Ghazanfar AA, Logothetis NK. 2003. Facial expressions linked to monkey calls. Nature 423:6943937–38
    [Google Scholar]
48. Gillan DJ, Premack D, Woodruff G. 1981. Reasoning in the chimpanzee: I. Analogical reasoning. J. Exp. Psychol. Anim. Behav. Process. 7::1–17
    [Google Scholar]
49. Gouteux S, Thinus-Blanc C, Vauclair J. 2001. Rhesus monkeys use geometric and nongeometric information during a reorientation task. J. Exp. Psychol. General 130:3505–19
    [Google Scholar]
50. Grosse Wiesmann C, Friederici AD, Singer T, Steinbeis N. 2017. Implicit and explicit false belief development in preschool children. Dev. Sci. 20:5e12445
    [Google Scholar]
51. Grosse Wiesmann C, Friederici AD, Singer T, Steinbeis N. 2020. Two systems for thinking about others’ thoughts in the developing brain. PNAS 117:126928–35
    [Google Scholar]
52. Hanus D, Call J. 2014. When maths trumps logic: probabilistic judgements in chimpanzees. Biol. Lett. 10:1220140892
    [Google Scholar]
53. Haun DBM, Call J, Janzen G, Levinson SC. 2006. Evolutionary psychology of spatial representations in the Hominidae. Curr. Biol. 16:1736–40
    [Google Scholar]
54. Haun DBM, Nawroth C, Call J. 2011. Great apes’ risk-taking strategies in a decision making task. PLOS ONE 6:12e28801
    [Google Scholar]
55. Hayashi T, Akikawa R, Kawasaki K, Egawa J, Minamimoto T et al. 2020. Macaques exhibit implicit gaze bias anticipating others’ false-belief-driven actions via medial prefrontal cortex. Cell Rep. 30:134433–44.e5
    [Google Scholar]
56. Hermer L, Spelke E. 1996. Modularity and development: the case of spatial reorientation. Cognition 61:3195–232
    [Google Scholar]
57. Hermer L, Spelke ES. 1994. A geometric process for spatial reorientation in young children. Nature 370:648457–59
    [Google Scholar]
58. Hermer-Vazquez L, Moffet A, Munkholm P. 2001. Language, space, and the development of cognitive flexibility in humans: the case of two spatial memory tasks. Cognition 79:3263–99
    [Google Scholar]
59. Hermer-Vazquez L, Spelke ES, Katsnelson AS. 1999. Sources of flexibility in human cognition: dual-task studies of space and language. Cogn. Psychol. 39:13–36
    [Google Scholar]
60. Heyes C. 2014. Submentalizing: I am not really reading your mind. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 9:2131–43
    [Google Scholar]
61. Heyes C. 2017. Apes submentalise. Trends Cogn. Sci. 21:11–2
    [Google Scholar]
62. Horschler DJ, MacLean EL, Santos LR. 2020. Do non-human primates really represent others’ beliefs?. Trends Cogn. Sci. 24:8594–605
    [Google Scholar]
63. Horschler DJ, Santos LR, MacLean EL. 2019. Do non-human primates really represent others’ ignorance? A test of the awareness relations hypothesis. Cognition 190:72–80
    [Google Scholar]
64. Horschler DJ, Santos LR, MacLean EL. 2021. How do non-human primates represent others’ awareness of where objects are hidden?. Cognition 212:104658
    [Google Scholar]
65. Hurley SE, Nudds ME. 2006. Rational Animals? Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
66. Jones JE, Antoniadis E, Shettleworth S, Kamil AC. 2002. A comparative study of geometric rule learning by nutcrackers (Nucifraga columbiana), pigeons (Columba livia), and jackdaws (Corvus monedula). J. Comp. Psychol. 116:350–56
    [Google Scholar]
67. Kamil AC, Jones JE. 1997. The seed-storing corvid Clark's nutcracker learns geometric relationships among landmarks. Nature 390:276–79
    [Google Scholar]
68. Kamil AC, Jones JE. 2000. Geometric rule learning by Clark's nutcrackers (Nucifraga colombiana). J. Exp. Psychol. Anim. Behav. Process. 26:439–53
    [Google Scholar]
69. Kaminski J, Call J, Tomasello M. 2008. Chimpanzees know what others know, but not what they believe. Cognition 109:2224–34
    [Google Scholar]
70. Kampis D, Kármán P, Csibra G, Southgate V, Hernik M 2021a. A two-lab direct replication attempt of Southgate, Senju and Csibra. ( 2007.) R. Soc. Open Sci. 8:8210190
    [Google Scholar]
71. Kampis D, Király I, Gergely G, Kovács ÁM, de la Heras A et al. 2021b. Great apes’ understanding of others’ beliefs involving object tracking: two manual search tasks Paper presented at the 43rd Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society Vienna, Austria:
72. Kampis D, Kovács ÁM. 2022. Seeing the world from others’ perspective: 14-month-olds show altercentric modulation effects by others’ beliefs. Open Mind 5:189–207
    [Google Scholar]
73. Kanngiesser P, Call J. 2010. Bonobos, chimpanzees, gorillas, and orang utans use feature and spatial cues in two spatial memory tasks. Anim. Cogn. 13:3419–30
    [Google Scholar]
74. Kano F, Krupenye C, Hirata S, Tomonaga M, Call J. 2019. Great apes use self-experience to anticipate an agent's action in a false-belief test. PNAS 116:4220904–9
    [Google Scholar]
75. Keil FC. 1989. Concepts, Kinds, and Cognitive Development Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
76. Kelly DM, Kippenbroch S, Templeton J, Kamil AC 2008. Use of geometric rule or absolute vectors: landmark use by Clark's nutcrackers (Nucifraga columbiana). Brain Res. Bull. 76:293–99
    [Google Scholar]
77. Kelly DM, Spetch ML. 2004. Reorientation in a two-dimensional environment: II. Do pigeons (Columba livia) encode the featural and geometric properties of a two-dimensional schematic of a room?. J. Comp. Psychol. 118:4384–95
    [Google Scholar]
78. Kelly DM, Spetch ML, Heth CD. 1998. Pigeons’ (Columba livia) encoding of geometric and featural properties of a spatial environment. J. Comp. Psychol. 112:3259–69
    [Google Scholar]
79. Kersken V, Zhang D, Gomez JC, Seed A, Ball DN. 2020. Capuchin monkeys individuate objects based on spatio-temporal and property/kind information: evidence from looking and reaching measures. Anim. Behav. Cogn. 7:3343–64
    [Google Scholar]
80. Köhler W. 1938. Simple structural functions in the chimpanzee and in the chicken. A Source Book of Gestalt Psychology WD Ellis217–27 London: Routledge
    [Google Scholar]
81. Kovacs AM, Teglas E, Endress AD. 2010. The social sense: susceptibility to others’ beliefs in human infants and adults. Science 330:60121830–34
    [Google Scholar]
82. Krachun C, Carpenter M, Call J, Tomasello M. 2009. A competitive nonverbal false belief task for children and apes. Dev. Sci. 12:4521–35
    [Google Scholar]
83. Krachun C, Carpenter M, Call J, Tomasello M. 2010. A new change-of-contents false belief test: children and chimpanzees compared. Int. J. Comp. Psychol. 23:2145–65
    [Google Scholar]
84. Krachun C, Lurz R, Russell JL, Hopkins WD. 2016. Smoke and mirrors: testing the scope of chimpanzees’ appearance-reality understanding. Cognition 150:53–67
    [Google Scholar]
85. Krupenye C, Call J. 2019. Theory of mind in animals: current and future directions. WIREs Cogn. Sci. 10:6e1503
    [Google Scholar]
86. Krupenye C, Kano F, Hirata S, Call J, Tomasello M. 2016. Great apes anticipate that other individuals will act according to false beliefs. Science 354:6308110–14
    [Google Scholar]
87. Krupenye C, Kano F, Hirata S, Call J, Tomasello M. 2017. A test of the submentalizing hypothesis: apes’ performance in a false belief task inanimate control. Commun. Integr. Biol. 10:4e1343771
    [Google Scholar]
88. Landau B, Smith LB, Jones SS. 1988. The importance of shape in early lexical learning. Cogn. Dev. 3:3299–321
    [Google Scholar]
89. Lazareva OF. 2012. Relational learning in a context of transposition: a review. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 97:2231–48
    [Google Scholar]
90. Learmonth AE, Nadel L, Newcombe NS. 2002. Children's use of landmarks: implications for modularity theory. Psychol. Sci. 13:4337–41
    [Google Scholar]
91. Learmonth AE, Newcombe NS, Huttenlocher J. 2001. Toddlers’ use of metric information and landmarks to reorient. J. Exp. Child. Psychol. 80:3225–44
    [Google Scholar]
92. Learmonth AE, Newcombe NS, Sheridan N, Jones M. 2008. Why size counts: children's spatial reorientation in large and small enclosures. Dev. Sci. 11:3414–26
    [Google Scholar]
93. Loewenstein J, Gentner D. 2005. Relational language and the development of relational mapping. Cogn. Psychol. 50:4315–53
    [Google Scholar]
94. Lurz R, Krachun C, Hopkins WD, Taglialatela J. 2022. Evidence of psychological essentialism in a symbol-trained bonobo (Pan paniscus). Int. J. Primatol. 43:235–52
    [Google Scholar]
95. MacDonald SE, Spetch ML, Kelly DM, Cheng K. 2004. Strategies in landmark use by children, adults, and marmoset monkeys. Learn. Motiv. 35::322–47
    [Google Scholar]
96. Margiotoudi K, Bohn M, Schwob N, Taglialatela J, Pulvermüller F et al. 2022. Bo-NO-bouba-kiki: picture-word mapping but no spontaneous sound symbolic speech-shape mapping in a language trained bonobo. Proc. R. Soc. B 289:20211717
    [Google Scholar]
97. Marsh HL, Adams L, Floyd C, MacDonald SE. 2013. Feature versus spatial strategies by orangutans (Pongo abelii) and human children (Homo sapiens) in a cross-dimensional task. J. Comp. Psychol. 127:2128–41
    [Google Scholar]
98. Marticorena DCW, Ruiz AM, Mukerji C, Goddu A, Santos LR. 2011. Monkeys represent others’ knowledge but not their beliefs. Dev. Sci. 14:61406–16
    [Google Scholar]
99. Martin A, Santos LR. 2014. The origins of belief representation: Monkeys fail to automatically represent others’ beliefs. Cognition 130:3300–8
    [Google Scholar]
100. McGurk H, MacDonald J. 1976. Hearing lips and seeing voices. Nature 264:5588746–48
     [Google Scholar]
101. Mendes N, Rakoczy H, Call J. 2008. Ape metaphysics: object individuation without language. Cognition 106:2730–49
     [Google Scholar]
102. Mendes N, Rakoczy H, Call J. 2011. Primates do not spontaneously use shape properties for object individuation: a competence or a performance problem?. Anim. Cogn. 14:3407–14
     [Google Scholar]
103. Mody S, Carey S 2016. The emergence of reasoning by the disjunctive syllogism in early childhood. Cognition 154:40–48
     [Google Scholar]
104. Murray EA, Kralik JD, Wise SP. 2005. Learning to inhibit prepotent responses: successful performance by rhesus macaques, Macaca mulatta, on the reversed-contingency task. Anim. Behav. 69:991–98
     [Google Scholar]
105. Nagel J. 2017. Factive and nonfactive mental state attribution. Mind Lang 32:5525–44
     [Google Scholar]
106. Öhman A, Fredrikson M, Hugdahl K, Rimmö PA. 1976. The premise of equipotentiality in human classical conditioning: conditioned electrodermal responses to potentially phobic stimuli. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 105:4313–37
     [Google Scholar]
107. Oktay-Gür N, Rakoczy H. 2017. Children's difficulty with true belief tasks: competence deficit or performance problem?. Cognition 166:28–41
     [Google Scholar]
108. Pauen S. 2002. The global-to-basic level shift in infants’ categorical thinking: first evidence from a longitudinal study. Int. J. Behav. Dev. 26:6492–99
     [Google Scholar]
109. Paukner A, Anderson JR, Fujita K 2006. Redundant food searches by capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella): a failure of metacognition?. Anim. Cogn. 9:2110–17
     [Google Scholar]
110. Penn DC, Holyoak KJ, Povinelli DJ. 2008. Darwin's mistake: explaining the discontinuity between human and nonhuman minds. Behav. Brain Sci. 31:2109–30
     [Google Scholar]
111. Penn DC, Povinelli DJ. 2007. On the lack of evidence that non-human animals possess anything remotely resembling a ‘theory of mind. .’ Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 362:1480731–44
     [Google Scholar]
112. Pepperberg IM. 1999. The Alex Studies: Cognitive and Communicative Abilities of Grey Parrots. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
113. Pepperberg IM, Gray SL, Mody S, Cornero FM, Carey S 2019. Logical reasoning by a Grey parrot? A case study of the disjunctive syllogism. Behaviour 156:5–8409–45
     [Google Scholar]
114. Perner J, Ruffman T. 2005. Infants’ insight into the mind: how deep?. Science 308:5719214–16
     [Google Scholar]
115. Phillips J, Buckwalter W, Cushman F, Friedman O, Martin A et al. 2020. Knowledge before belief. Behav. Brain. Sci. 44:e140
     [Google Scholar]
116. Phillips J, Norby A. 2021. Factive theory of mind. Mind Lang 36:13–26
     [Google Scholar]
117. Phillips W, Santos LR. 2007. Evidence for kind representations in the absence of language: experiments with rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta). Cognition 102:3455–63
     [Google Scholar]
118. Phillips W, Shankar M, Santos LR. 2010. Essentialism in the absence of language? Evidence from rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta). Dev. Sci. 13:4F1–7
     [Google Scholar]
119. Potì P, Bartolommei P, Saporiti M. 2005. Landmark use by Cebus apella. . Int. J. Primatol. 26::921–48
     [Google Scholar]
120. Poulin-Dubois D, Rakoczy H, Burnside K, Crivello C, Dörrenberg S et al. 2018. Do infants understand false beliefs? We don't know yet – a commentary on Baillargeon, Buttelmann and Southgate's commentary. Cogn. Dev. 48:302–15
     [Google Scholar]
121. Povinelli DJ, Vonk J. 2004. We don't need a microscope to explore the chimpanzee's mind. Mind Lang 19:11–28
     [Google Scholar]
122. Premack D. 1976. Intelligence in Ape and Man Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Assoc.
123. Premack D 1978. On the abstractness of human concepts: why it would be difficult to talk to a pigeon. Cognitive Processes in Animal Behavior SH Hulse, H Fowler, WK Honig, NJ Hillsdale 423–51 Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc.
     [Google Scholar]
124. Premack D. 1983. The codes of man and beasts. Behav. Brain Sci. 6:1125–36
     [Google Scholar]
125. Premack D, Woodruff G. 1978. Does the chimpanzee have a theory of mind?. Behav. Brain Sci. 1:4515–26
     [Google Scholar]
126. Rakoczy H, Bergfeld D, Schwarz I, Fizke E. 2015. Explicit theory of mind is even more unified than previously assumed: belief ascription and understanding aspectuality emerge together in development. Child Dev. 86:2486–502
     [Google Scholar]
127. Ramachandran VS, Hubbard EM. 2001. Synaesthesia—a window into perception, thought and language. J. Conscious. Stud. 8:3–34
     [Google Scholar]
128. Rivera SM, Zawaydeh AN. 2007. Word comprehension facilitates object individuation in 10- and 11-month-old infants. Brain Res. 1146:146–57
     [Google Scholar]
129. Rosati AG, Hare B. 2011. Chimpanzees and bonobos distinguish between risk and ambiguity. Biol. Lett. 7:115–18
     [Google Scholar]
130. Rugani R, Vallortigara G, Priftis K, Regolin L. 2015. Number-space mapping in the newborn chick resembles humans’ mental number line. Science 347:6221534–36
     [Google Scholar]
131. Santos LR, Sulkowski GM, Spaepen GM, Hauser MD. 2002. Object individuation using property/kind information in rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta). Cognition 83:3241–64
     [Google Scholar]
132. Seligman MEP. 1970. On the generality of the laws of learning. Psychol. Rev. 77::406–18
     [Google Scholar]
133. Shifferman EM. 2009. Its own reward: lessons to be drawn from the reversed-reward contingency paradigm. Anim. Cogn. 12:547–58
     [Google Scholar]
134. Shumaker RW, Palkovich AM, Beck BB, Guagnano GA, Morowitz H. 2001. Spontaneous use of magnitude discrimination and ordination by the orangutan (Pongo pygmaeus). J. Comp. Psychol. 115:4385–91
     [Google Scholar]
135. Smirnova A, Zorina Z, Obozova T, Wasserman E. 2015. Crows spontaneously exhibit analogical reasoning. Curr. Biol. 25::256–60
     [Google Scholar]
136. Southgate V, Senju A, Csibra G. 2007. Action anticipation through attribution of false belief by 2-year-olds. Psychol. Sci. 18:7587–92
     [Google Scholar]
137. Sovrano VA, Bisazza A, Vallortigara G. 2002. Modularity and spatial reorientation in a simple mind: encoding of geometric and nongeometric properties of a spatial environment by fish. Cognition 85:2B51–59
     [Google Scholar]
138. Sovrano VA, Bisazza A, Vallortigara G. 2003. Modularity as a fish (Xenotoca eiseni) views it: conjoining geometric and nongeometric information for spatial reorientation. J. Exp. Psychol. Anim. Behav. Proc. 29:3199–210
     [Google Scholar]
139. Spelke E. 1994. Initial knowledge: six suggestions. Cognition 50:1–3431–45
     [Google Scholar]
140. Spelke ES, Kinzler KD. 2007. Core knowledge. Dev. Sci. 10:189–96
     [Google Scholar]
141. Spetch ML, Cheng K, MacDonald SE. 1996. Learning the configuration of a landmark array: I. Touch-screen studies with pigeons and humans. J. Comp. Psychol. 110:55–68
     [Google Scholar]
142. Spetch ML, Cheng K, MacDonald SE, Linkenhoker BA, Kelly DM, Doerkson SR. 1997. Use of landmark configuration in pigeons and humans: II. Generality across search tasks. J. Comp. Psychol. 111:14–24
     [Google Scholar]
143. Surian L, Caldi S. 2010. Infants’ individuation of agents and inert objects. Dev. Sci. 13:1143–50
     [Google Scholar]
144. Thomas RK, Ingram DK. 1979. Conceptual volume judgments by squirrel monkeys. Am. J. Psychol. 92::33–43
     [Google Scholar]
145. Thompson RKR, Oden DL. 1996. A profound disparity revisited: perception and judgment of abstract identity relations by chimpanzees, human infants, and monkeys. Behav. Process. 35:149–61
     [Google Scholar]
146. Thompson RKR, Oden DL, Boysen ST. 1997. Language-naive chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) judge relations between relations in a conceptual matching-to-sample task. J. Exp. Psychol. Anim. Behav. Process. 23:131–43
     [Google Scholar]
147. Tinklepaugh OL. 1928. An experimental study of representative factors in monkeys. J. Comp. Psychol. 8:3197–236
     [Google Scholar]
148. Tomasello M, Carpenter M, Call J, Behne T, Moll H. 2005. Understanding and sharing intentions: the origins of cultural cognition. Behav. Brain Sci. 28:5675–735
     [Google Scholar]
149. Uttal DH, Sandstrom LD, Newcombe NS. 2006. One hidden object, two spatial codes: young children's use of relational and vector coding. J. Cogn. Dev. 7:503–25
     [Google Scholar]
150. Vallortigara G, Feruglio M, Sovrano VA. 2005. Reorientation by geometric and landmark information in environments of different size. Dev. Sci. 8:5393–401
     [Google Scholar]
151. Vallortigara G, Zanforlin M, Pasti G. 1990. Geometric modules in animals’ spatial representations: a test with chicks (Gallus gallus domesticus). J. Comp. Psychol. 104:3248–54
     [Google Scholar]
152. Van de Walle GA, Carey S, Prevor M. 2000. Bases for object individuation in infancy: evidence from manual search. J. Cogn. Dev. 1:3249–80
     [Google Scholar]
153. Vargas JP, López JC, Salas C, Thinus-Blanc C. 2004. Encoding of geometric and featural spatial information by goldfish (Carassius auratus). J. Comp. Psychol. 118:2206–16
     [Google Scholar]
154. Vlamings PHJM, Uher J, Call J. 2006. How the great apes (Pan troglodytes, Pongo pygmaeus, Pan paniscus, and Gorilla gorilla) perform on the reversed contingency task: the effects of food quantity and food visibility. J. Exp. Psychol. Anim. Behav. Process. 32:60–70
     [Google Scholar]
155. Völter CJ, Call J 2017. Causal and inferential reasoning in animals. APA Handbook of Comparative Psychology: Perception, Learning, and Cognition J Call, GM Burghardt, IM Pepperberg, CT Snowdon, T Zentall 643–71 Washington, DC: Am. Psychol. Assoc.
     [Google Scholar]
156. Wasserman E, Castro L, Fagot J 2017. Relational thinking in animals and humans: from percepts to concepts. APA Handbook of Comparative Psychology: Perception, Learning, and Cognition J Call, GM Burghardt, IM Pepperberg, CT Snowdon, T Zentall 359–84 Washington, DC: Am. Psychol. Assoc.
     [Google Scholar]
157. Wellman HM, Cross D, Watson J. 2001. Meta-analysis of theory-of-mind development: the truth about false belief. Child Dev. 72:3655–84
     [Google Scholar]
158. Wiggins D. 1997. Sortal concepts: a reply to Xu. Mind Lang 12:3–4413–21
     [Google Scholar]
159. Wimmer H, Perner J. 1983. Beliefs about beliefs: representation and constraining function of wrong beliefs in young children's understanding of deception. Cognition 13:1103–28
     [Google Scholar]
160. Xu F, Carey S 1996. Infants’ metaphysics: the case of numerical identity. Cogn. Psychol. 30:2111–53
     [Google Scholar]
161. Xu F, Cote M, Baker A. 2005. Labeling guides object individuation in 12-month-old infants. Psychol. Sci. 16:5372–77
     [Google Scholar]
162. Yerkes RM, Yerkes DN. 1928. Concerning memory in the chimpanzee. J. Comp. Psychol. 8:3237–71
     [Google Scholar]