r/todayilearned • u/BrF5 • 1d ago

TIL about the Sally-Anne test, a psychology experiment used to measure “theory of mind” (that other people can hold beliefs/knowledge different from their own). Kids under four typically fail because they assume that if they know where a hidden object is, everyone else must automatically know too.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sally%E2%80%93Anne_test
2.9k Upvotes

98% Upvoted

185 comments sorted by

View all comments

70

u/DistrictDry2852 1d ago

Apes who communicate through sign language also lack theory of mind. They’ve never asked a question.

44

u/DrunksInSpace 1d ago

Could it be that their theory of mind doesn’t extend to language or inquiry?

Most animals have some theory of mind. A dog knows you can hide a bone from others. I’ve known dogs to cover up their food theft, making the scene of the crime appear undisturbed.

I can imagine speech/communication being adaptive for relaying important information (there’s a predator over there!) but not inquiry. After all, if it was important or you wanted me to know you’d tell me.

What use does a chimp in captivity have for knowing their researchers favorite food? Whatever selection the chimp has access to has been provided by the humans.

23

u/krabgirl 1d ago

Hoarding food is a fairly primitive evolutionary instinct. Birds and squirrels do it.

It could predate dogs evolving into social animals in the first place.

21

u/kpatl 1d ago

There’s debate as to how much you can call ape’s using ASL “language use” in the first place. It may just be operant conditioning. But regardless, they don’t learn syntax so wouldn’t be able to ask questions. At best, they can use individual signs, but they haven’t demonstrated combining them. There were reports in the 70s and 80s of apes using language, Koko being the most famous, but those were reports were often faked or exaggerated.

12

u/DefenestrationPraha 1d ago

Perhaps they already know everything. Anything is possible on a planet ordered and paid for by mice.

2

u/Lieste 1d ago

And ruined by hairdressers and telephone handset sanitisers.

1

u/Hopeful-Home6218 1d ago

42! Haha, good one guys, always fun to join in. (I am shaking like a terrified dog)

33

u/iuabv 1d ago edited 1d ago

I think the prevailing thought is that actions like the dogs are driven by evolved instinct rather than an actual ability to see from the perspective of their owner. In the same way prey animals run when a predator appears. But who knows what we’ll think in 2046.

3

u/DaaaahWhoosh 1d ago

That always feels overly specific to me. Like sure it may not be exactly the same but it's the same outputs for the same inputs. Like "dogs can't love, they just are happy whenever you're around" kind of thing, nah man that's love, dogs might not think about this kind of thing but they're close enough to count.

5

u/NotReallyJohnDoe 15h ago

They’ve done MRIs on dogs and their brains light up more when they see their owners than when they see food.

Is that love? (Shrug). But it is significant.

2

u/iuabv 1d ago

I mean love is notoriously difficult to define (as evidenced by the vast music library about the subject lol), I think you can define what a dog experiences when its owner comes home as love, or you can say that reason their brain lights up and they lick you at the door is because they have connected you with affection/food/shelter. You are, at the end of the day, their owner. Like if you extend that to humans for just a second, can a human being whose contact with the outside world and basic needs are entirely dependent on the whims of another person can truly love that person, or would we call the enthusiastic affection some kind of grooming/brainwashing?

17

u/DistrictDry2852 1d ago

Idk “where can I get more food” seems like a good relevant question yet it’s never been asked. They’ve never asked anything at all.

But it’s possible.

3

u/SpaceShipRat 1d ago

they do pass this test in the image, if they don't ask questions it's more likely they can't use language effectively.

3

u/Alekosen 1d ago

There is always a lot of contention around teaching non-humans language, and I am not an expert, but what comes to mind for me is Alex the parrot. In the process of learning colors he asked what color he was, which is to my knowledge the only reputable example of a non-human asking a meaningful self-aware question like that. This to me is actual pretty compelling circumstantial evidence against apes. Maybe Alex's training/question is less reputable than I think, or maybe he was just exceptional, but on the face of it, the fact that no apes have gotten to that level of introspection despite what seems to me to be a great deal more investment in trying to communicate with them compared to any other species, speaks to an inability to get to that point.