Az összehasonlító elmekutatás dinamikusan fejlődő tudományterület, melynek egyik fő oka, hogy a kognitív pszichológia saját kutatási stratégiájaként egyre inkább sikerrel integrálja az evolúciós és etológiai szemléletet, valamint az összehasonlító módszert. Az emberi elmeképességek ezen új perspektívába való helyezése lehetőséget teremt arra, hogy mélyebb belátást nyerhessünk a kognitív képességek evolúciójának és működésének titkaiba. Az elmúlt 50–60 év kutatásainak köszönhetően a kognitív működés egyes területeiről hatalmas mennyiségű információ halmozódott fel. Ilyen például a piagetiánus tárgyállandóság, az a kognitív „eszköz”, amely különböző objektumok megtalálását és nyomon követését segíti, s amelynek sokszempontú összehasonlító elemzése – mint cseppben a tenger – jól példázza, hogy jelenleg hol tart, milyen módon működik, és miféle problémákkal küzd az összehasonlító elmekutatás. A cikk rövid áttekintést ad a tárgyállandóság mérésére kialakított módszerekről, valamint a képesség viselkedési megnyilvánulásairól és egyedfejlődési lépéseiről az ember és más fajok esetében. Részletesen ismertetjük a tárgyállandósági vizsgálatok egy fontos jelenségét, az ún. A-nem-B hibát. Ennek oka, hogy kevés olyan jól leírható, viszonylag egyszerűen tesztelhető és nagy empirikus adatbázissal megtámogatott sajátossága van az ember és más primáta fajok kognitív fejlődésének, mint ez a speciális keresési válasz. Kontextusfüggése, főemlős fajokra vonatkozó univerzális jellege, az egyedfejlődés során tapasztalható sajátos felbukkanása, majd eltűnése szinte vonzza a különböző magyarázatokat. Egyszersmind nagyon jó alkalmat adhat arra, hogy némi belátást szerezzünk az elmeképesség egyedfejlődésének folyamatába. Elsősorban a csecsemőkutatás eredményeire támaszkodva rendszerezett áttekintést adunk azokról a hipotézisekről, melyek az A-nem-B hiba megjelenésével kapcsolatban kerültek megfogalmazásra. Ezek közül külön is tárgyaljuk azt az elméletet, mely szerint az A-nem-B hiba nem(csak) a fizikai kogníció (tárgyreprezentációs képességek) működésének egyedfejlődési sajátossága, hanem a szociális kogníció (kommunikációs kulcsokra való érzékenység) egy fontos komponensének indikátora.
1. Aguiar, A., Baillargeon, R. (1999): 2.5-month-old infants’ reasoning about when objects should and should not be occluded. Cognitive Psychology, 39, 116–157.
2. Baillargeon, R. (1991): Reasoning about the height and location of a hidden object in 4.5- and 6.5-month-old infants. Cognition, 38, 13–42.
3. Baillargeon, R. (1995): Physical reasoning in infancy. In: Gazzaniga, M. S. (ed.), The Cognitive Neurosciences. MIT Press, 181–204.
4. Baillargeon, R., Graber, M. (1988): Where's the rabbit? 5.5-month-old infants’ representation of the height of a hidden object. CognitiveDevelopment, 2, 375–392.
5. Baillargeon, R., Spelke, E. S., Wasermann, S. (1985): Object permanence in five-month-olds. Cognition, 20, 191–208.
6. Bekoff, M., Jamieson, D. (1990): Cognitive ethology and applied philosophy: The significance of an evolutionary biology of mind. Tree, 5, 156–159.
7. Bogartz, R. S., Shinskey, J. L., Schilling, T. H. (2000): Object permanence in five-and-a-halfmonth-old infants? Infancy, 1, 403–428.
8. Bräuer, J., Kaminski, J., Riedel, J., Call, J., Tomasello, M. (2006): Making inferences about the location of hidden food: Social dog, causal ape. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 120, 38–47.
9. Bremner, J. G. (2001): Cognitive development: Knowledge of the physical world. In: Bremner, G., Fogel, A. (eds.), Infant Development. Blackwell, 99–138.
10. Butterworth, G. E., Jarret, N., Hicks, L. (1982): Spatio-temporal identity in infancy: A perceptual competence or conceptual deficit? Developmental Psychology, 18, 435–449.
11. Cacchione, T., Krist, H. (2004): Recognizing impossible object relations: Intuitions about support in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 118, 140–148.
12. Call, J. (2001): Object permanence in orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus), chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes), and children (Homo sapiens). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 115, 159–171.
13. Clearfield, M. V., Dineva, E., Smith, M. B., Diedrich, F. J., Thelen, E. (2009): Cue salience and infant perseverative reaching: Test of the dynamic field theory. Developmental Science, 12, 26–40.
14. Collier-Baker, E., Suddendorf, T. (2006): Do chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and 2-year-old children (Homo sapiens) understand double invisible displacement? Journal of Comparative Psychology, 120, 89–97.
15. Collier-Baker, E., Davis, J. M., Suddendorf, T. (2004): Do dogs (Canis familiaris) understand invisible displacement? Journal of Comparative Psychology, 118, 421–433.
16. Cummings, E. M., Bjork, E. L. (1989): Infant search errors: Stage of concept development or stage of memory development. Memory and Cognition, 12, 1–19.
17. Csibra, G., Gergely, Gy. (2006): Social learning and social cognition: The case for pedagogy. In: Munakata, Y., Johnson, M. H. (eds.), Processes of Change in Brain and Cognitive Development. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 249–274.
18. Darwin, C. (1871): The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex. London: John Murray.
19. de Blois, S. T., Novak, M. A. (1994): Object permanence in rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 108, 318–327.
20. de Blois, S. T., Novak, M. A., Bond, M. (1998): Object permanence in orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus) and squirrel monkeys (Saimiri sciureus). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 112, 137–152.
21. Diamond, A. (1985): Development of the ability to use recall to guide action, as indicated by infants performans on AB. Child Development, 56, 868–883.
22. Diamond, A. (1990): Developmental time course in human infants and infant monkeys, and the neural bases, of inhibitory control in reaching. In: Diamond, A. (ed.), The Development and Neural Bases of Higher Cognitive Functions. New York, Academy of Sciences, 637–676.
23. Diamond, A. (1991): Neuropsychological insights into the meaning of object concept development. In: Carey, S., Gelman, R. (eds.), The Epigenesis of Mind. Essays on Biology and Cognition. Erlbaum, 67–110.
24. Diamond, A., Towle, C., Boyer, K. (1994): Young childrens performance on a task sensitive to the memory functions of the medial temporal-lobe in adults. The delayed-nonmatching-to-sample task reveal problems that are due to non-memory-related task demands. Behavioural Neuroscience, 108, 659–680.
25. Doré, F. Y. (1986): Object permanence in adult cats. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 100, 340–347.
26. Doré, F. Y. (1990): Search behavior of cats (Felis catus) in an invisible displacement test –congnition and experience. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 44, 359–370.
27. Doré, F. Y. (1991): A neo-piagetian theory can contribute to comparative studies of cognitive development. Behavioral Brain Sciences, 14, 368–369.
28. Doré, F. Y., Dumas, C. (1987): Psychology of animal cognition: Piagetian studies. Psychological Bulletin, 102, 219–233.
29. Doré, F. Y., Goulet, S. (1998): The comparative analysis of object knowledge. In: Langer, J., Killen, M. (eds.), Piaget, Evolution, and Development. Erlbaum, 55–72.
30. Doré, F. Y, Fiset, S., Goulet, S., Dumas, M., Gagnon, S. (1996): Search behavior in cats and dogs: Interspecific differences in working memory and spatial cognition. Animal Learning and Behavior, 24, 142–149.
31. Dumas, C., Doré, F. Y. (1989): Cognitive development in kittens (Felis catus). A cross-sectional study of object permanence. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 103, 191–200.
32. Erdőhegyi, Á., Topál, J., Virányi, Zs., Miklósi, Á. (2007): Dog-logic: Inferential reasoning in a two-way choice task and its restricted use. Animal Behaviour, 74, 725–737.
33. Etienne, A. S. (1973): Searching behavior towards a disappearing prey in the domestic chick as affected by preliminary experience. Animal Behaviour, 21, 749–761.
34. Funk, M. S. (1996): Development of object permanence in the New Zealand parakeet (Cyanoramphus auriceps). Animal Learning and Behaviour, 21, 749–761.
35. Gagnon, S., Doré, F. Y. (1992): Search behaviour in various breeds of adult dogs (Canis familiaris): Object permanence and olfactory cues. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 106, 58–68.
36. Gagnon, S., Doré, F. Y. (1993): Search behaviour of dogs (Canis familiaris) in invisible displacement problems. Animal Learning and Behaviour, 21, 246–254.
37. Gagnon, S., Doré, F. Y. (1994): A cross-sectional study of object permanence in domestic puppies (Canis familiaris). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 108, 220–232.
38. Gergely, Gy., Egyed, K., Király, I. (2007): On pedagogy. Developmental Science, 10, 139–146.
39. Gibson, K. R. (1990): New perspectives on instincts and intelligence: Brain size and the emergence of hierarchical mental constructional skills. In: Parker, S. T., Gibson, K. R. (eds.), Language and Intelligence in Monkeys and Apes: Comprative Developmental Perspectives. Cambridge, U.K., Cambridge University Press, 97–128.
40. Gomez, J. C. (2004): Apes, Monkeys, Children and the Growth of Mind. Harvard University Press.
41. Gopnik, A., Meltzoff, A. N. (1997): Words Thoughts and Theories. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press.
42. Griffin, D. R. (1976): The Question of Animal Awareness: Evolutionary Continuity of Mental Experience. New York, Rockefeller University Press.
43. Griffin, D. R., Speck, G. B. (2004): New evidence of animal consciousness. Animal Cognition, 7, 5–18.
44. Hauser, M. D. (1998): Expectations about object motion and destination: experiments with a nonhuman primate. Developmental Science, 1, 31–38.
45. Hauser, M. D. (2003): Knowing about knowing. Dissociations between perception and action systems over evolution and during development. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1001, 79–103.
46. Hespos, S. J., Baillargeon, R. (2001): Reasoning about containment events in very young infants. Cognition, 78, 207–245.
47. Hofstadter, M., Reznik, J. (1996): Response modality affects human infant delayed-response performance. Child Development, 67, 647–658.
48. Hood, B. M. (1995): Gravity rules for 2- to 4-year olds? Cognitive Development, 10, 577–598.
49. Hood, B. M., Hauser, M. D., Anderson, L., Santos, L. (1999): Gravity biases in a non-human primate? Developmental Science, 2, 35–41.
50. Hulse, S., Fowler, H., Honig, W. K. (eds.) (1978): Cognitive Processes in Animal Behavior. Hillsdale, NJ, Edbaum.
51. Kiss Szabolcs (2001): A tárgyfogalom kialakulása az egyedfejlődés során. Pszichológia, 21, 249–267.
52. Langer, J. (2000): The heterochronic evolution of primate cognitive development. In: Parker, S. T. (ed.), Biology, Brains, and Behavior: The Evolution of Human Development. School of American Research Press, 215–235.
53. Longo, M. R., Berthental, B. I. (2006): Common coding of observation and execution of action in 9-month-old infants. Infancy, 10, 43–59.
54. Marcovitch, S., Zelazo, P. D. (1999): The A-not-B error: Results from a logistic meta-analysis. Child Development, 70, 1297–1313.
55. Marcovitch, S., Zelazo, P. D., Schmuckler, M. A. (2002): The effect of the number of a trials on performance on the A-not-B task. Infancy, 3, 519–529.
56. Meltzoff, A. N., Moore, M. K. (1998): Object representation, identity and paradox of early permanence: Steps toward a new framework. Infant Behavior and Development, 21, 201–235.
57. Mendes, N., Huber, L. (2004): Object permanence in common marmosets (Callithrix jaccus). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 118,103–112.
58. Miklósi, Á., Topál, J., Gácsi, M., Csányi, V. (2006): Social cognition in dogs: Integrating homology and convergence. In: Fujita, K., Itakura, S. (eds.), Diversity of Cognition: Evolution, Development, Domestication and Pathology. Kyoto, Kyoto University Press, 119–142.
59. Munakata, Y. (1997): Perseverative reaching in infancy: The roles of hidden toys and motor history in the AB task. Infant Behavior and Development, 20, 405–415.
60. Munakata, Y. (2001): Graded representations in behavioral dissociations. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 5, 309–315.
61. Natale, F., Antinucci, F. (1989): Patterns of object manipulation. In: Antinucci, F. (ed.), Cognitive Structure and Development in Nonhuman Primates. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 145–161.
62. Natale, E., Antinucci, E., Spinozzi, G., Poti, E. (1986): Stage 6 object concept in nonhuman primate cognition: A comparison between gorilla (Gorilla gorilla gorilla) and japanese macaque (Macaca fuscuta). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 100, 335–339.
63. Neiworth, J. J., Steinmark, E., Basile, B. M., Wonders, R., Steely, F., DeHart, C. (2003): A test of object permanence in a new-world monkey species, cotton top tamarins (Saguinus oedipus). Animal Cognition, 6, 27–37.
64. Osthaus, B., Slater, A. M., Lea, S. E. (2003): Can dogs defy gravity? A comparison with the human infant and a non-human primate. Developmental Science, 6, 489–497.
65. Parker, S. T., McKinney, M. L. (1999): Origins of Intelligence. Johns Hopkins.
66. Penn, D. C., Holyoak, K .J., Povinelli, D. J. (2008): Darwin's mistake: Explaining the discontinuity between human and nonhuman minds. Behavior and Brain Sciences, 31, 109–178.
67. Pepperberg, I. M., Kozak, F. A. (1986): Object permanence in the African grey parrot (Psittacus erithacus). Animal Learning and Behavior, 14, 322–330.
68. Pepperberg, I. M., Willner, M. R., Gravitz, L. B. (1997): Development of Piagetian object permanence in a grey parrot (Psittacus erithacus). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 111, 63–75.
69. Piaget, J. (1954): The Construction of Reality in the Child. New York, Basic Books.
70. Pollok, B., Prior, H., Güntürkün, O. (2000): Development of object permanence in food-storing magpies (Pica pica). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 114, 148–157.
71. Povinelli, D. J. (2000): Folk Physics for Apes. Oxford University Press.
72. Rizzolatti, G., Craighero, L. (2004): The mirror-neuron system. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 27, 169–192.
73. Roitblat, H. L., Bever, T. G., Terrace, H. S. (1984): Animal Cognition. Hillsdale, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
74. Ruffmann, T., Langman, L. (2002): Infants’ reaching in a multi-well A not B task. Infant Behavior and Development, 25, 237–246.
75. Ruffmann, T., Slade, L., Redman, J. (2005): Young infants’ expectations about hidden objects. Cognition, 97, 35–43.
76. Santos, L., Hauser, M. D. (2002): A nonhuman primate's understanding of solidity: Dissociations between seeing and acting. Developmental Science, 5, 1–7.
77. Smith, L. B., Thelen, E. (2003): Development as a dynamic system. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 343–348.
78. Smith, L. B., Thelen, E., Titzier, R., McLin, D. (1999): Knowing in the context of acting: The task dinamics of the A-not-B error. Psychological Reviews, 106, 235–260.
79. Soproni, K., Miklósi, Á., Topál, J., Csányi, V. (2001): Comprehension of human communicative signs in pet dogs. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 115, 122–126.
80. Southgate, V., van Maanen, C., Csibra, G. (2008): Infant pointing: Communication to cooperate or communication to learn? Child Development, 78, 735–740.
81. Szetei, V., Miklósi, Á., Topál, J., Csányi, V. (2003): When dogs seem to loose their nose: an investigation on the use of visual and olfactory cues in communicative context between dog and owner. Applied Animal Behavior Sciences, 83, 41–152.
82. Szigeti J . (1995): Másfél-kétéves gyerekek tükör előtti önfelismerésének, tárgyállandósági fogalmának és a dedukció kapcsolatának vizsgálata. Szakdolgozat. ELTE BTK.
83. Thelen, E., Schöner, G., Scheiner, C., Smith, L. B. (2001): So what's a modeler to do? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, 70–86.
84. Tomasello, M., Call, J. (1997): Primate Cognition. New York, Oxford University Press.
85. Topál, J., Gergely, Gy., Miklósi, Á., Erdőhegyi, Á., Csibra, G. (2008): Infants perseverative search errors are induced by pragmatic misinterpretation. Science, 321, 1831–1834.
86. Topál, J., Erdőhegyi, Á., Csibra, G., Gergely, Gy., Miklósi, Á. (2009a): Differential sensitivity to human communication in dogs, wolfes and human infants. Science, 325, 1269–1272.
87. Topál, J., Miklósi, Á., Gácsi, M., Dóka, A., Pongrácz, P., Kubinyi, E., Virányi, Zs., Csányi, V. (2009b): Dog as a complementary model for understanding human social behavior. Advances in the Study of Behavior, 39, 71–116.
88. Triana, E., Pasnak, R. (1981): Object permanence in cats and dogs. Animal Learning and Behavior, 9, 135–139.
89. Uzgiris, I. C., Hunt, J. (1975): Assessment in Infancy: Ordinal Scales of Psychological Development. Champaign, University of Illinois Press.
90. Watson, J. S., Gergely, Gy., Topál, J., Gácsi, M., Sárközi, Zs., Csányi, V. (2001): Distinguishing logic versus association in the solution of an invisible displacement task by children and dogs: Using negation of disjunction. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 115, 219–226.
91. Wellmann, H. M., Cross, D., Bartsch, K. (1987): Infant search and object permanence: A meta-analysis of the A-not-B error. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 51,1–51.
92. Wilcox, T., Baillargeon, R. (1998): Object individuation in infancy: The use of featural information in reasoning about occlusion events. Cognitive Psychology, 37, 97–155.
93. Wise, K. L., Wise, L. A., Zimmermann, R. R. (1974): Piagetian object permanence in the infant rhesus monkey. Developmental Psychology, 10, 429–437.
94. Yoon, J. M. D., Johnson, M. H., Csibra, G. (2008): Communication-induced memory bias in preverbal infants. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences U.S.A., 105, 13690–13695.
95. Zelazo, P. D., Reznick, J. S., Spinazzola, J. (1998): Representational flexibility and response control in a multistep multilocation search task. Developmental Psychology, 34, 203–214.
96. Zucca, P., Milos, N., Vallortigara, G. (2007): Piagetian object permanence and its development in Eurasian jays (Garrulus glandarius). Animal Cognition, 10, 243–258.