{"title":"创新的大脑","authors":"S. Healy","doi":"10.1093/OSO/9780199546756.003.0005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Not least because humans are inveterate inventors, innovation is considered to be a reason that other animals have big brains. The Innovative Brain Hypothesis really came into being when Lefebvre et al. suggested that innovation could be a way to assess cognitive abilities in wild animals, which tend not to be amenable to cognitive testing in the traditional, laboratory context. The collection of a data set of foraging innovations in birds (and a similar data set later collected for primates) has provided opportunities to test the main hypothesis in this chapter. Innovations were later divided into technical and non-technical innovations, with the former perhaps leading to more correlations with brain size than the latter. I conclude that this is a very appealing hypothesis but that the evidence is not especially persuasive.","PeriodicalId":246976,"journal":{"name":"Adaptation and the Brain","volume":"2014 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Innovative Brain\",\"authors\":\"S. Healy\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/OSO/9780199546756.003.0005\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Not least because humans are inveterate inventors, innovation is considered to be a reason that other animals have big brains. The Innovative Brain Hypothesis really came into being when Lefebvre et al. suggested that innovation could be a way to assess cognitive abilities in wild animals, which tend not to be amenable to cognitive testing in the traditional, laboratory context. The collection of a data set of foraging innovations in birds (and a similar data set later collected for primates) has provided opportunities to test the main hypothesis in this chapter. Innovations were later divided into technical and non-technical innovations, with the former perhaps leading to more correlations with brain size than the latter. I conclude that this is a very appealing hypothesis but that the evidence is not especially persuasive.\",\"PeriodicalId\":246976,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Adaptation and the Brain\",\"volume\":\"2014 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-03-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Adaptation and the Brain\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/OSO/9780199546756.003.0005\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Adaptation and the Brain","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/OSO/9780199546756.003.0005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Not least because humans are inveterate inventors, innovation is considered to be a reason that other animals have big brains. The Innovative Brain Hypothesis really came into being when Lefebvre et al. suggested that innovation could be a way to assess cognitive abilities in wild animals, which tend not to be amenable to cognitive testing in the traditional, laboratory context. The collection of a data set of foraging innovations in birds (and a similar data set later collected for primates) has provided opportunities to test the main hypothesis in this chapter. Innovations were later divided into technical and non-technical innovations, with the former perhaps leading to more correlations with brain size than the latter. I conclude that this is a very appealing hypothesis but that the evidence is not especially persuasive.