The repeatability of cognitive performance: a meta-analysis

Behavioural and cognitive processes play important roles in mediating an individual's interactions with its environment. Yet, while there is a vast literature on repeatable individual differences in behaviour, relatively little is known about the repeatability of cognitive performance. To further our understanding of the evolution of cognition, we gathered 44 studies on individual performance of 25 species across six animal classes and used meta-analysis to assess whether cognitive performance is repeatable. We compared repeatability (R) in performance (1) on the same task presented at different times (temporal repeatability), and (2) on different tasks that measured the same putative cognitive ability (contextual repeatability). We also addressed whether R estimates were influenced by seven extrinsic factors (moderators): type of cognitive performance measurement, type of cognitive task, delay between tests, origin of the subjects, experimental context, taxonomic class and publication status. We found support for both temporal and contextual repeatability of cognitive performance, with mean R estimates ranging between 0.15 and 0.28. Repeatability estimates were mostly influenced by the type of cognitive performance measures and publication status. Our findings highlight the widespread occurrence of consistent inter-individual variation in cognition across a range of taxa which, like behaviour, may be associated with fitness outcomes.This article is part of the theme issue 'Causes and consequences of individual differences in cognitive abilities'.

Discrimination of Polymorphous Stimulus Sets by Pigeons

Pigeons were trained to perform a visual discrimination between stimulus sets in which the presence of any two of three positive features made a stimulus positive, while any two of three negative features made it negative (there were thus three different positive and three different negative stimuli). After training, the birds were exposed to test stimuli that contained either all three positive or all three negative features. In Experiment I three pigeons were successfully trained by a successive method, and subsequently responded to the test stimuli as though they were positive or negative respectively. In Experiment II four pigeons were trained by a simultaneous method. Three learned the discrimination and generalized appropriately to the test stimuli, but they showed no preference between positive test and positive training stimuli, nor any consistent difference in speed of response to them; and similar results were found for negative stimuli. It is argued from this that the pigeons learned to respond to the stimuli as patterns (configurations of features) rather than to the constituent features, but that they generalized to the test stimuli by using the common features. The experiments show that pigeons could in principle learn to discriminate natural polymorphous classes (such as “pigeon” or “person”) without using any single feature, but neither the present experiments nor earlier ones demonstrating discriminations of such natural classes establish that pigeons make use of polymorphous concepts in the same way as people.

The Non-Occurrence of a Stimulus as a Signal

Two groups of rats were rewarded for pressing a panel following a varying number of bar presses; a signal following the bar press indicated whether or not a panel press would be rewarded if made before the next bar press. For one group the signal indicating reward was a flash of light, for the other it was the non-occurrence of the flash (in the latter case the flash thus signalled non-reward). The first group learned to withold panel presses except when reward was signalled, but the second group did not. This result is related to the “feature positive effect” of Jenkins and Sainsbury (1970), in which pigeons failed to withold pecks at a negative stimulus display when it was the same as the positive display except for the addition of a distinctive feature.

'The thieving magpie'? No evidence for attraction to shiny objects

It is widely accepted in European culture that magpies (Pica pica) are unconditionally attracted to shiny objects and routinely steal small trinkets such as jewellery, almost as a compulsion. Despite the long history of this folklore, published accounts of magpies collecting shiny objects are rare and empirical evidence for the behaviour is lacking. The latter is surprising considering that an attraction to bright objects is well documented in some bird species. The present study aims to clarify whether magpies show greater attraction to shiny objects than non-shiny objects when presented at the same time. We did not find evidence of an unconditional attraction to shiny objects in either captive or free-living birds. Instead, all objects elicited responses indicating neophobia in free-living birds. We suggest that humans notice when magpies occasionally pick up shiny objects because they believe the birds find them attractive, while it goes unnoticed when magpies interact with less eye-catching items. The folklore may therefore result from observation bias and cultural inflation of orally transmitted episodic events.

Why are modern families small? Toward an evolutionary and cultural explanation for the demographic transition

As societies modernize, they go through what has become known as "the demographic transition;" couples begin to limit the size of their families. Models to explain this change assume that reproductive behavior is either under individual control or under social control. The evidence that social influence plays a role in the control of reproduction is strong, but the models cannot adequately explain why the development of small family norms always accompanies modernization. We suggest that the widening of social networks, which has been found to occur with modernization, is sufficient to explain the change in reproductive norms if it is assumed that (a) advice and comment on reproduction that passes among kin is more likely to encourage the creation of families than that which passes among nonkin and (b) this advice and comment influence the social norms induced from the communications. This would, through a process of cultural evolution, lead to the development of norms that make it increasingly difficult to have large families.

Oystercatchers use colour preference to achieve longer-term optimality

The optimal diet model entails that foragers look beyond the individual prey encounter, to at least the level of intake rate across a bout of foraging, but optimization over a longer time remains controversial. In this paper, we show how oystercatchers increase their intake over the longer term using mussel colour as a cue. Wintering oystercatchers Haematopus ostralegus feed extensively on mussels Mytilus edulis in the estuaries of southern Britain. They show a marked preference for brown-shelled mussels over the commoner black-shelled morph, and we show that this enables them to maximize their rate of energy gain over a longer period than a single foraging bout. The brown and black mussels did not differ in ventral thickness and energy content, which are the main criteria for mussel selection and most important for short-term optimization. The brown mussels contained significantly less moisture, so by selecting them, oystercatchers could pack more mussel flesh into their limited oesophageal storage capacity. This enables them to increase their overall consumption during a feeding bout and increases their long-run energy gain rate, to an extent that is large enough to be significant for survival, especially during the short exposure of the mussel beds in winter.

The changing trade-off between food finding and food stealing in juvenile oystercatchers

When juvenile oystercatchers, Haematopus ostralegus, first arrived on the wintering grounds in August and September, they regularly stole mussels, Mytilus edulis, from other, mainly older, oystercatchers. By October, however, juveniles stole far fewer mussels and found almost all their mussels independently for themselves on the mussel bed. Although stealing a mussel was always less profitable than taking a mussel from the mussel bed, a simple rate-maximizing optimality model showed that, in August and September, juveniles increased both their net and gross rates of energy intake by stealing because they were rather inefficient at foraging for themselves. By October, their greater efficiency at finding good quality mussels, combined with the increased resistance of potential victims to kleptoparasitic attacks, resulted in higher intake rates if juveniles stopped stealing mussels and took mussels only from the mussel bed. Copyright 1998 The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour Copyright 1998 The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour.