The field of Comparative Psychology has serious problems

What is it about?

We borrow from Stephen Jay Gould's book title, ‘The mismeasure of man’, to highlight that contemporary studies comparing chimpanzees to humans are systematically biased in claiming humans are superior to apes in social cognition. There are many variables, other than evolutionary history, that could account for the group differences found in these studies, and these variables are systematically confounded with species membership. Moreover, many contemporary studies claim that the purported 'species' differences arise from differences in mental states. such as understanding, or shared intentionality. We argue that these claims are unfalsifiable, in large part, because it is impossible to directly measure mental states in apes or humans

Featured Image

Why is it important?

We argue that Comparative Psychology, as a field of study, is at a crisis point. Contemporary theories of the evolution of intelligence are based on two-group, two-species comparisons with fatal flaws in both design and interpretation. Therefore, these studies cannot inform our understanding of what aspects of cognition differ across the species. We argue that changes are required, for example, in sampling species across multiple settings because there is strong evidence that socio-ecology impacts cognition. We argue that changes are required in argumentation, e.g., using logical and scientific reasoning and not basing theory or hypotheses on unmeasurable, imaginary, purportedly causal mental states. With necessary changes in the design and interpretation of comparative studies, we can build valid theories of cognitive evolution.