4.7 Article

The shifting shelf task: a new, non-verbal measure for attentional set shifting

出版社

ROYAL SOC
DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2022.1496

关键词

attentional set shifting; cognitive flexibility; executive functions; rule switching; comparative cognition

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study compared the performance of 3-5-year-old children and chimpanzees on an attentional set shifting task. The results showed that chimpanzees and 3-4-year-old children performed similarly on this task, while 5-year-old children performed better. This suggests that chimpanzees and children share similar attentional set shifting capacities, but there are unique changes in humans at the age of 5.
Attentional set shifting is a core ingredient of cognition, allowing for fast adaptation to changes in the environment. How this skill compares between humans and other primates is not well known. We examined performance of 3- to 5-year-old children and chimpanzees on a new attentional set shifting task. We presented participants with two shelves holding the same set of four boxes. To choose the correct box on each shelf, one has to switch attention depending on which shelf one is currently presented with. Experiment 1 (forty-six 3- to 5-year olds, predominantly European White) established content validity, showing that the majority of errors were specific switching mistakes indicating failure to shift attention. Experiment 2 (one hundred and seventy-eight 3- to 6-year olds, predominantly European White) showed that older children made fewer mistakes, but if mistakes were made, a larger proportion were switching mistakes rather than 'random' errors. Experiment 3 (52 chimpanzees) established suitability of the task for non-human great apes and showed that chimpanzees' performance was comparable to the performance of 3- and 4-year olds, but worse than 5-year olds. These results suggest that chimpanzees and young children share attentional set shifting capacities, but that there are unique changes in the human lineage from 5 years of age.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据