Narrator: Listen to part of a lecture in a psychology class.

旁白；听一段心理学的演讲。

Professor: We’ve been talking about animal cognition—the study of animal intelligence.

教授：我们讨论了动物的认知——关于动物智商的研究。

Now, much of the research in this area is motivated by the search for animal analogs, or parallels to human cognitive processes.

现在，在这个领域的大部分的研究都是由寻找动物类似物所激起的，或者说找和人类认知过程相同的过程所激起的。

And one of the processes we’ve been investigating is metacognition.

其中一个我们已经在研究的过程就是元认知。

What is metacognition?

什么是元认知？

Well, it’s being aware of what one knows or feels, uh, um… having an awareness of one’s state of mind.

这指的是人们知道或者感觉到的，意识得到自己的思维状态，

And making decisions about behavior based on what one knows.

并且根据自己所知道的去做出决定。

Researchers have long been interested in whether animals possess this capability, but…but couldn’t test it because animals aren’t able to report their feelings.

研究人员一直都对动物是否有这样的能力感兴趣，但是……由于动物不能报告他们的感觉，所以无法测试。

But recently one group of researchers found a way to solve this problem.

但是，最近，有一群研究人员发现了，有一种方法可以解决这个问题。

They did studies with…with monkeys and dolphins that provide evidence that these animals have the ability to feel uncertainty, to feel unsure about something and…and…well, to know that they are uncertain.

他们用猴子和海豚去做研究，用来证明动物是有能力去感觉到不确定性的，去感觉到他们对一些东西是不肯定的。

So how could these researchers figure out if an animal feels uncertainty?

那么，这些研究人员是怎么发现这些动物感觉到不确定的呢？

Well, it began with a study one of them did on a dolphin, who had been trained to recognize a particular high-pitched tone.

这个是由一个研究开始的，这个研究用海豚作实验。这只海豚被训练去识别一个特定的高音。

The dolphin was taught to press one of two paddles depending on whether it heard the high tone or one that was lower.

这只海豚按2个开关中的一个去表示它是否听到了这个高音，或者那个稍低的音。

Food was a reward for a correct response.

正确的答案会有食物作为奖励。

But if the wrong paddle was pressed, the dolphin had to wait several seconds before it could try again.

但是，如果按错了开关，海豚必须要等几秒钟去重新按。

The task varied in difficulty according to the pitch of the second tone.

这个任务的难度根据第二个音的音高会有所不同。

The closer it came in pitch to the first one, the harder it became for the dolphin to correctly identify it as low.

和第一个音的音高越接近，海豚能够识别出这个低音的难度就越大。

And the researcher noted that the dolphin is quite eager to press the paddle when it was sure of the answer, but exhibited hesitation during difficult trials.

研究人员发现，当海豚觉得答案非常肯定的时候，它就会非常迫切地要按开关，但是在高难度的测试当中，会表现出犹豫。

Next the researcher introduced a third option, a third paddle that would initiate a new trial, giving the dolphin the choice of passing on difficult trials.

随后，研究人员引入了第三个选项，一个发起新实验的第三个开关，这个开关使得海豚在做高难度的测试时，可以选择跳过。

Once the dolphin figured out the result of pressing this new paddle, it did choose it frequently when the trial was difficult.

一旦海豚发现了按这个信开关的结果，当测试非常难的时候，它就很频繁地按这个开关。

The researcher took that as an indication that the animal wanted to pass because it didn’t know the answer and knew it didn’t know.

研究人员将这个作为一种指示，指出海豚由于不知道答案，不且知道自己不知道而想要选择跳过。

But there was a problem.

但是这里有一个问题。

Other researchers protested that the… the opt-out response was simply a learned or conditioned response.

其他研究人员反对说，这种选择退出的反应指示一个条件反应。

You remember intro to psychology, right?

你们还记得心理学入门课程的，对不对？

In other words, by pressing the pass paddle, the dolphin avoided having to wait and hasten the possibility of a food reward by moving directly to the next trial.

换句话说，通过按跳过开关，海豚避免了等待的时间，并且通过直接进入下一个测试，加快了得到完整奖励的可能性。

So the experiment didn’t necessarily indicate that the dolphin had knowledge of its own uncertainty, just that it wanted to avoid negative consequences.

所以，这个实验未必表明了海豚有能力意识到它自己的不确定，它只是想避免不好的结果。

So more recently, our researcher and his colleagues devised a new study, this time using monkeys.

所以，最近，我们的研究员和他的同事们设计了一个新的研究，这一次用的是猴子。

In this experiment, the monkeys had to identify certain patterns displayed on a computer screen.

在这个实验中，猴子必须在电脑屏幕上识别特定的图案。

These patterns were analogous to the tones used in the dolphin study.

这些图案和海豚实验中的音是类似的。

One type of pattern was of a specific density and was to be classified as dense, while the second type of pattern could vary in density, but was always less dense than the first one.

其中一种图案有着特定的密度，并且被归类为密集的，而第二种类型的图案在密度上会有所变化，但是一直都会比第一种稀疏一点。

And the monkeys’ task was to identify this second type as sparse.

猴子的任务是去将这第二种图案识别为稀疏的。

So the denser the second type of pattern was, the more difficult the task became.

所以第二种图案越密，这个任务就越困难。

And as in the previous study, the monkeys were given a third choice that would allow them to pass on to a new trial.

和第一个研究一样，猴子可以选择跳过进入到新的测试。

But unlike in the dolphin experiment, the monkeys had to complete four trials before they got any feedback.

但是，并不像海豚实验那样，猴子必须在完成了4个测试之后才会得到反馈。

They didn’t know if they responded correctly or incorrectly after each trial because there was no reward or punishment.

他们并不知道他们回答的是正确的还是错误的，因为并没有奖励或者惩罚。

At the end of four trials, feedback was given.

在所以测试结束的时候，它们会得到反馈。

The monkeys received a full reward for each correct response.

猴子会得到正确答案的奖励。

And a time-out during which a buzzer was sounded for each incorrect response.

针对每一个错误的答案，会有一个暂停，暂停期间蜂鸣器会响起。

But the monkeys had no way to tell which reward or punishment was associated with which response.

但是，猴子是不知道到底哪一个奖励或者惩罚是针对哪一个答案的。

And they didn’t get either reward or punishment for choosing the pass option, the…um…the uncertainty response.

而对于跳过的选项，也就是不确定的选项，既没有奖励，也没有惩罚。

But nevertheless they still chose this option in the appropriate circumstances when the trial was particularly difficult.

但是，当测试非常困难的时候，它们仍然在合适的情况下选择跳过选项。

And this is evidence that it wasn’t simply a conditioned response, because that response didn’t guarantee a faster reward.

这个证据就表明它并不是条件反应，因为这样的回答并不能确保一个更快的奖赏。

So what does all this tell us about animal consciousness or animals’ awareness of themselves and their state of mind?

所以，关于动物意识或者说动物对于他们自己、他们思维的状态的意识，这又告诉了我们一些什么？

Can we really know what’s going on in the minds of animals?

我们真的能够知道动物们脑子里到底在想什么吗？

No. Of course not.

不，当然不能。

But exploring the metacognitive capacity of animals could become an important criterion in highlighting the similarities and differences between human and animal minds.

但是探索动物们的元认知可以是强调人类和动物思维之间差异的一个重要的评判标准。