title: Animal mindreading: what's the problem?
abstract: Research on mindreading in animals has the potential to address fundamental questions about the nature and origins of the human capacity to ascribe mental states, but it is a research programme that seems to be in trouble. Between 1978 and 2000 several groups used a range of methods, some with considerable promise, to ask whether animals can understand a variety of mental states. Since that time, many enthusiasts have become sceptics, empirical methods have become more limited, and it is no longer clear what research on animal mindreading is trying to find. In this article I suggest that the problems are theoretical and methodological: there is difficulty in conceptualising alternatives to 'full-blown' mindreading, and reluctance to use the kinds of empirical methods necessary to distinguish mindreading from other psychological mechanisms. I also suggest ways of tackling the theoretical and methodological problems that draw on recent studies of mindreading in humans, and the resources of experimental psychology more generally. In combination with the use of inanimate control stimuli, species that are unlikely to be capable of mindreading, and the 'goggles method', these approaches could restore both vigour and rigour to research on animal mindreading.
authors.affiliation: All Souls College and Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK, cecilia.heyes@all-souls.ox.ac.uk.
authors.forename: Cecilia
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Heyes
mesh_terms: D000819:Animal Communication; D000818:Animals; D004644:Emotions; D006801:Humans; D009633:Nonverbal Communication; D056345:Theory of Mind
references.citation: Percept Psychophys. 2008 Jan;70(1):77-87
references.pmid: 18306962
references.citation: Science. 2014 Jun 20;344(6190):1243091
references.pmid: 24948740
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2014 Jun;40(3):929-937
references.pmid: 24377486
references.citation: Anim Behav. 2000 Apr;59(4):771-785
references.pmid: 10792932
references.citation: Trends Cogn Sci. 2008 May;12(5):187-92
references.pmid: 18424224
references.citation: Biol Lett. 2013 Feb 23;9(1):20120829
references.pmid: 23193044
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2010 Oct;36(5):1255-66
references.pmid: 20731512
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 1989 Oct;15(4):338-46
references.pmid: 2794870
references.citation: Atten Percept Psychophys. 2010 Apr;72(3):695-705
references.pmid: 20348576
references.citation: Psychon Bull Rev. 2002 Jun;9(2):314-8
references.pmid: 12120794
references.citation: Behav Brain Sci. 1998 Feb;21(1):101-14; discussion 115-48
references.pmid: 10097012
references.citation: Dev Sci. 2014 Sep;17(5):647-59
references.pmid: 24666559
references.citation: Child Dev. 1993 Dec;64(6):1688-705
references.pmid: 8112113
references.citation: Proc Biol Sci. 2011 Feb 22;278(1705):634-40
references.pmid: 20826480
references.citation: Science. 1986 Dec 12;234(4782):1361-6
references.pmid: 3538419
references.citation: Anim Cogn. 2007 Oct;10(4):439-48
references.pmid: 17426993
references.citation: Anim Behav. 2001 Jan;61(1):139-151
references.pmid: 11170704
references.citation: Perspect Psychol Sci. 2014 Mar;9(2):131-43
references.pmid: 26173251
references.citation: Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2007 Apr 29;362(1480):507-22
references.pmid: 17309867
references.citation: J Comp Physiol Psychol. 1972 Oct;81(1):1-11
references.pmid: 4672573
references.citation: Psychol Rev. 1954 May;61(3):167-74
references.pmid: 13167243
references.citation: Psychol Sci. 2011 Jul;22(7):878-80
references.pmid: 21642553
references.citation: Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2007 Apr 29;362(1480):731-44
references.pmid: 17264056
references.citation: Dev Psychol. 2008 Sep;44(5):1257-65
references.pmid: 18793060
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011 Feb 15;108(7):3077-9
references.pmid: 21282649
references.citation: J Comp Psychol. 1990 Sep;104(3):203-10
references.pmid: 2225758
references.citation: Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2012 Oct 5;367(1603):2695-703
references.pmid: 22927568
references.citation: Curr Biol. 2012 Jan 24;22(2):R51-2
references.pmid: 22280906
references.citation: Cognition. 2010 Nov;117(2):230-6
references.pmid: 20817158