Talk:Cat intelligence
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Cat abilities and tricks
The cat abilities and tricks section contains pretty much no evidence backing its statements up, and the introduction also contains the claim that dogs cannot perform these 'tricks' on their own, only with the order of a 'master'. However, dogs are entirely capable of performing all of the 'abilities and tricks' listed whilst on their own without a human even present (with the possible exception of using a toilet, for obvious logistical reasons..). The comparison to dogs is entirely irrelevant and merely represents some author's inability to avoid anthropomorphism and introducing 'cats are better than dogs' to the article.
In fact, the majority of this section is entirely irrelevant due to its lack of citation, and should probably be removed. Some sections are almost nonsensical - the cat is an animal with the ability to climb; thus, is it really showing 'intelligence' for one of these animals to retrieve food from the top of a refrigerator? Any number of insects could accomplish the same feat.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.46.166.190 (talk) 13:16, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
ALSO, the statement "Cats are social animals, usually living in family packs. In a domestic situation, the human family becomes their 'pack'. If the cat has a good emotional relationship with their owners, training can be a fun 'game'" is misleading. Cats can be socialized, and most domestic cats are, but they are by nature loners, very territorial, hunting by night and abiding during the day alone and sleeping much of the time. At least, that is the natural behavior in the wild. Domestic cats are not "pack animals." They are not canines. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.38.49.52 (talk) 07:25, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Yippie
Finnially! a cat intelligence article!
- You should be able to contain your excitement, since it was you who wrote the article. I suppose the article has been missing, but remember when you write for Wikipedia to cite your sources, do not use original research, and write from a neutral point of view. The article is not quite up to those standards yet, but I'm sure we'll get it there. Haakon 21:49, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
I only wanted to start a disscusion! :P
-
- Some of the things here are so difficult to believe. I agree with what Haakon has said. Zephyr2k 23:47, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
It's a work in progress! I want people to add things! :P
-
- Yeah, I know it's a work in progress. Sorry if I offended you in any way. But really, that cat tricks section needs to be redone. ^_^ Zephyr2k 15:30, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- I'll admit, I was a little harsh on the last message, and I will try to make it better by adding more on why a cat would do those things, and I haven't really mastered footnotes. Meep!
-
- The language in this article is in dire need of a grammar check. There are a number of sentences which are tenuous at best, and at worst, incoherent. This article lacks the professional standards of most Wikipedia entries, and could do with a re-write.
-
- I'm only 12! Also, I have loads to do! Since I know the most about Neopets of my friends, guess who everyone asks for help? I have other things on my agenda so if you think it needs to be improved feel free to research this and add more! The external links are good if you want to add stuff.
-
-
- You shouldn't take the criticism personally. Wikipedians, including you, only want to produce the best articles possible. You gave us a good starting point for an article that was missing earlier, and I'm sure you'll participate in improving it over time, too. Haakon 08:43, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
-
If anyone's interested, I added an external link ("How Intelligent Are Cats?") that could be useful in fixing up this page a bit. Biagini 03:39, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- Yes. It is good.
-
-
-
[edit] My space, her space
Cats are territorial; therefore I have trained my cat to stay on the tiled portion of my house and not go onto the carpet. It was really easy. Every time she started to walk on the carpet, I said "NO" in a firm voice. The most important thing was never to confuse her by letting her on the carpet occassionally. It is an all or nothing thing. She sometimes vomits or poops on the floor, so I really needed to have this rule. It has worked out great.
I also had a cat that would follow me everywhere. He was really my neighbor's cat, but he spent most of his free time at my house. If I made kissing noises, he would roll over; so as a trick, I would say "roll over," then make the kissing noise. Everyone thought I had trained the cat to understand me. Really the cat had trained me!:-)
I have a cat now who, I noticed, licks herself whenever I stroke her back in a certain way; so now I say "lick yourself, " stroke her, and everyone thinks I trained her.
My friends cat was a real scaredey cat who always ran home at the first sign of danger. Once some guy was walking down the street with his dog. I new the cat would run home, but he hadn't noticed the dog. Then when the man and dog were between the cat and the cat's home I yelled, "watch out, it's an attack cat. The cat noticed the dog and ran straight at them to get home. The poor guy almost messed his pants. Am I bad?
BmikeSci 21:01, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
- No, you're just gay. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.84.67.224 (talk) 14:15, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Brain Size
Should we delete the "Brain Size" section? After all, it's somewhat poorly written and there's no correlation between brain size and intelligence, so why should we have it?--Stratford15 05:42, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
- No, we should NOT delete 'Brain Size'! It's as scientific as some of the wierd stuff said in "Dog Intelligence" such as the towel stuff.
- I also think we ought to leave the stuff on brain size in there. I just cleaned up the grammar, so that's not a problem, and anyway brain size stats are pretty standard when discussing the intelligence of any animal, regardless of the fact that the discussion tends to end with "but there's no proof of direct correlation between brain size and intelligence." And about that last thing: I think the inevitable caveat about a possible brain size-to-intelligence correlation has more to do with small intra-species variation than it does with much larger inter-species variation. In other words, if my brain is bigger than yours, that fact alone doesn't say much about how smart either of us humans might be--the variation just isn't that meaningful. But if your brain is normal-sized for a person and mine is the size of a cat's, well, wouldn't you say it's a pretty good bet that you're going to be a bit smarter than me? In other words, size does matter sometimes, but it always depends on the context of the discussion. (The question of whether the brain mass-to-body mass ratio is meaningful in this context is, however, way beyond my level of expertise.) Oh, and one last thing for everyone: PLEASE SIGN YOUR COMMENTS! All it takes is four tildes... Buck Mulligan 21:46, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
- I'm glad some one agreed with me! I spent awhile researching all the information for that part, Iwould be greatly offended if someone was to delete a section or vandalized it. Sorry if I tend not to sign. Sometimes I prefer to be anonymous. I hope you understand that. :) B katt 500 02:09, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
- I also think we ought to leave the stuff on brain size in there. I just cleaned up the grammar, so that's not a problem, and anyway brain size stats are pretty standard when discussing the intelligence of any animal, regardless of the fact that the discussion tends to end with "but there's no proof of direct correlation between brain size and intelligence." And about that last thing: I think the inevitable caveat about a possible brain size-to-intelligence correlation has more to do with small intra-species variation than it does with much larger inter-species variation. In other words, if my brain is bigger than yours, that fact alone doesn't say much about how smart either of us humans might be--the variation just isn't that meaningful. But if your brain is normal-sized for a person and mine is the size of a cat's, well, wouldn't you say it's a pretty good bet that you're going to be a bit smarter than me? In other words, size does matter sometimes, but it always depends on the context of the discussion. (The question of whether the brain mass-to-body mass ratio is meaningful in this context is, however, way beyond my level of expertise.) Oh, and one last thing for everyone: PLEASE SIGN YOUR COMMENTS! All it takes is four tildes... Buck Mulligan 21:46, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
- I thought surface area was cm2... Stuart Morrow 21:32, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
- Yes. If you put it in squared, you get 82 cm squared. I did the squaring already so others don't have to. B katt 500 00:43, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
- Not sure about the cortical area of the cat being 82 cm2, but the figure for the human brain of 1350-1400 cm is the 'volume, not the cortical area (and thus should be cm3). The cortical area for the human brain is actually the better part of a square meter when fully unfolded (Kandel and Schwartz should have a more precise figure). So, I would strongly suggest someone double-check both numbers to check that they indeed are correct, as onje of them at least is obviously wrong.--Ramdrake (talk) 16:21, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yes. If you put it in squared, you get 82 cm squared. I did the squaring already so others don't have to. B katt 500 00:43, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
- I thought surface area was cm2... Stuart Morrow 21:32, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
-
-
[edit] Me Likie How Article Ees Turning Out
Yes, I LOVE how my bit of reasearch and knowledge is turning into a great article!B katt 500 02:50, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Cat vs. Dog
We need some info on cat intelligence vs. dog intelligence. - Peregrinefisher 20:23, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
- Tool usage, brain surface area comparison, and tests. Will reasearch!B katt 500 23:41, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
- Actually, I decided to not. We do NOT need cats vs. dogs trash in this article. Go make a cats vs. dogs article if you must.B katt 500 00:40, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Citing References and sources
I will remove the 'This Article Does Not Cite Its References and Sources' box because no other article the same length has as many notes as this! How this NOT be classed as an article that has cited it's sources!B katt 500 23:56, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Article no lie...
Cats do observe and learn. A cat who lives near my apartment sometimes follows me around. I climbed a tree to the highest point. The cat did not see me climb up for he was in his house. Only after I had sat there for a considerable amount of time had he found me in a tree. The cat climbed the tree, yet couldn't quite get to where I was. He gave up, yet waited for me at the bottom of the tree. As I climbed down, the cat watched me very carfully (I know this because I was watching the cat very carefully). Next time, I'm pretty sure that he'll get up to the top with me
[edit] Dog Intelligence
WHY IS THERE A LINK TO DOG INTELLIGENCE ON THE 'SEE ALSO' SECTION!!! CAT INTELLECT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH DOGS!!! I will delete it.
[edit] Failed GA
This article was a GA candidate, though I failed it for the following reasons- too short of lede, lack of sources, and overall looking pretty short. Hurricanehink (talk) 04:17, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
- There are two problems with two of the reasons it failed:
- 1. It DOES NOT lack sources!!! I do not know how it can lack sources!
- 2. There are no doubt many short articles that are still good articles!
B katt 500 02:44, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
-
- I added some more to the introduction about cat intelligence.B katt 500 02:53, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Catman breed needs to be removed
I believe the "catman" breed needs to be removed. Or am I missing something? Going to the "catman" disambiguation page shows no breed. InlovewithGod 19:01, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
- I have no clue why that was there. It wasn't classed, it was just there. B katt 500 03:00, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Polydactyl cats
It might be worth mentioning these cats as capable of more interesting tricks. Not so much because they are smarter but because they have "thumbs" which allows them to do more interesting and "intelligent" things.--72.140.175.249 17:31, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
- Ok, well I'll add that, but you could do that yourself! User:b katt 500
[edit] The relative intelligence of a normal DSH/DLH cat
How intelligent is your average moggie compaired to the pedigrees? I'd like to know and I'm sure people interested in this subject would be as well. Cheers. Patrick Bayer BSc 14:47, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
- It depends. Beacause there are so many mutt cats, and all of them have different roots, it is too hard to figure it out.69.226.52.95 03:28, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Himalayan Intelligence
I disagree on Animal Planet's intelligence ranking of the Himalayan breed. Himalayans are known to pretty damn smart (that's why Mr. Jinx in Meet the Parents was a Himalayan). I'd like to know what methods Animal Planet used to test the breeds... obediance is not a measure of intelligence! --Candy-Panda 09:13, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
- I KNOW obedience doesn't matter with intelligence! Thats why I have stuff about the brain! I don't know how they were ranked, but that is the rank of the Himalayan!B katt 500 03:30, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Speaking of cat intelligence...
I inserted a "citation needed" flag in the section on intelligence by breed because I couldn't find anything on Animal Planet's website to back up these rankings. It would be great if somebody (preferably the person who put the list there in the first place) could fill in a citation. Thanks. Buck Mulligan 18:21, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
- The list at the bottom of Animal Planet's cat breed directory has links to individual breeds, each of which has a list of character stats. I'd guess that's where our list is taken from, but as AP doesn't mention their testing criteria/method (or information source, if they got it from elsewhere), I don't know whether that means it should all be removed?
- B katt 500 added the list, and will hopefully comment here :) --Quiddity 19:34, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
-
- Yep, that's the page I found when I went looking for a proper citation. Now I see that somebody has gone through the names of a bunch of breeds and counted the little boxes in the space next to "intelligence"--just an oversight on my part. I also just found the page we need for the business about measuring intelligence in terms of "smarts," whatever that means, so I'll insert the necessary citations. I don't think there's really any need to remove the list, since Animal Planet is about as close to an authority on these things as one is likely to find, short of heading into the lab. Also, so long as we've got that caveat in the form of the quote from the cat trainer about intelligence being basically impossible to measure objectively, we ought to be fine. After all, it's not like measuring human intelligence is any less controversial! Thanks for getting me to take another look at the AP site, Quiddity. Buck Mulligan 20:01, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
- No prob, I went there looking a few weeks ago, but their site was even slower than it is today! Section looks much better now. Just "cat tricks" to cleanup next... --Quiddity 21:09, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
- Yep, that's the page I found when I went looking for a proper citation. Now I see that somebody has gone through the names of a bunch of breeds and counted the little boxes in the space next to "intelligence"--just an oversight on my part. I also just found the page we need for the business about measuring intelligence in terms of "smarts," whatever that means, so I'll insert the necessary citations. I don't think there's really any need to remove the list, since Animal Planet is about as close to an authority on these things as one is likely to find, short of heading into the lab. Also, so long as we've got that caveat in the form of the quote from the cat trainer about intelligence being basically impossible to measure objectively, we ought to be fine. After all, it's not like measuring human intelligence is any less controversial! Thanks for getting me to take another look at the AP site, Quiddity. Buck Mulligan 20:01, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
- Okay, it's all taken care of. Buck Mulligan 20:31, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry if this section has caused any confusion. I haven't been on for a while. I do wonder how Animal Planet rated the cat's inteligence too. Perhaps they tested 100 cats of each breed and took the average, or maybe they just asked owners of each breed (which would be pretty biased), yet I do know that is how the results turned out.B katt 500 03:31, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
- Okay, it's all taken care of. Buck Mulligan 20:31, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
-
-
[edit] Removed from GA nominee list
I removed this article from the GA nominee list because technically it was not nominated correctly (there was no GA nominee template on this page). Also I don't think a nomination was appropriate when you have an essay banner, and a citation requested template that have not been addressed in the cat tricks section. Finally, although I am not formally reviewing the article, I would say that the sources for the toilet training subsection of cat tricks, which are anecdotal accounts on web pages, don't meet the standard for reliable sources for an article on a scientific topic. I do think the brain size and learning sections are reasonable but the rest of the article is rather unencyclopedic for a GA nomination. The cat tricks section in particular would need a lot of work.Rusty Cashman 18:51, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Comments re: cat intelligence
Citations are needed for the following statements of "fact": 1. Cats are solitary predators, so they need to think more about how they catch their prey than pack animals, such as wolves. 2. Cats are less willing to please than dogs, therefore are more difficult to teach tricks.
Also need to delete entirely (as being non-factual, unless good citations can be provided): 1. Feline blinking section (conclusion is not based on facts presented, no citation). 2. Turning on water: in general cats lack the physical ability to turn modern taps, never mind adjust the temperature. They may take advantage of a tap left running. Citation needed for anything else. 4. Retrieving items: No logical link is provided between retrieval and Thorndike's boxes. One demonstrates persistence and a degree of ingenuity, the other memory and the capacity to learn. They are different concepts. As well, most of the examples of "intelligence" in this section are really no more than trial and error and the usual instinct of repeating behaviors that are rewarded. It is the premise behind most learning models. That cats have the capacity for basic learning does not reflect intelligence. The same goes for "Using the Toilet", "Opening Doors and Windows", and "Playing Fetch". Simple lure/shape - reward models as opposed to measures of intellect. Dev33 05:53, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
- I have removed the comment about solitary predators needing to think more. It is complete nonsense. For example, Digger Wasps are solitary predators, and studies have shown their behaviour to be completely mindless. Fricasso 00:23, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Who cares about Animal Planet?
Why is there a whole paragraph going on and on about how Animal Planet is not a scientific investigation? I think that should be taken out or trimmed way down... 216.237.177.2 04:48, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
The Animal Planet rankings need some explanation or a link to their original list. It isn't clear what the categories mean. Fijagdh (talk) 05:18, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] The ability to identify eyes remarkable?
"Cats will respond to a human who purposefully closes and opens their eyes by reciprocating the action. This perhaps illustrates a remarkable aspect of cat intelligence that is rare in non-human animals; that they are able to identify and relate part of their own anatomy to the same structure on another species."
The ability to identify eyes and figure out what they are looking at is such an useful ability for both predators and prey that I have a hard time believing this is truly remarkable. Cat eyes or human eyes, they are still eyes. --Lakefall 22:01, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
- Actually, when a cat slowly blinks at you, it's giving you a kiss! (Same with people blinking at cats- the cat will react accordingly and may even "kiss" you back). I had remembered reading this somewhere (though I can't remember where) so I did a little looking around to be sure I had remembered correctly- you can find some examples here, here, and here. SnoLeopurrd 05:34, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Spatial recall
An anon has deleted this section twice. I can understand that the reference given [1] is unreliable, but it refers to a reliable source (which I cannot find a copy of online). I'm just leaving this note here for someone else to follow up on. --Quiddity 17:48, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Persistent memory
Note of interest: Stepping of the forelegs over obstacles establishes long-lasting memories in cats via Cats need to navigate an obstacle to remember it. To be added. --Quiddity 19:39, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] There may be a wording problem that needs correction
"It can be conjectured that, while pressures to please another life form might be strong in a social animal, they are weak or non-existent in a predator"
But shouldn't that be 'solitary predator' and not simply "predator", because there are social predators out there who have higher social intelligence. eg. Lions.
I am not an expert on the subject so I will leave it to the experts to make the changes, if any need to be made. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Necromancer44 (talk • contribs) 08:29, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] ==2 Question marks==
"Cats' learning abilities are aided by their good memory, recalling certain information much longer than dogs - up to 16 hours"
This seems an odd claim to me, considering it is quite normal for cats that have been missing for weeks to know their way around their territory once they are returned, and head for their familiar food place to request food.
Inability to remember anything beyond 16 hours would be a fatal handicap in the wild, if it were real. Cats take months to learn to hunt, and retain the skill lifelong, even after being confined indoors for a month or more.
"Since they are not social animals,"
The phrasing is wide open to misinterpretation imho, as people will often interpret it as meaning cats aren't sociable, which is far from true, as any fan of cats will know. Tabby (talk) 02:19, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Paws and manipulation
"Cats' paws are not designed for manipulation,"
they seem to manipulate mice pretty skilfully. The difference is the lack of opposable thumb, the consequence of which is that cats do many tasks with their mouth that we would use our paws for. This really does not mean that paws aren't designed for manipulation, the possession of multiple toes is a big evolutionary step in manipulation ability, and claws improve manipulation ability further.
Some (polydactyl) cats do have thumbs, but they don't use them the way we do. I guess either they're not opposable or cats don't have the degree of muscle manipulability there to control them independantly. Tabby (talk) 02:20, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
- Pretty much the only ways that cats spontaneously use their paws (outside of body movement and scratching) are to bat small objects from side-to-side or towards themselves, or to hold things down so they can get at them with their mouths. That's why researchers have found it almost impossible to train cats to push things outwards with their paws. AnonMoos (talk) 15:10, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Cats reading.jpg
Image:Cats reading.jpg The image seems unnecessary, and seems to some point misleading, and could make it look like cats can actually read. Does the article really need an image of cats, people already know what cats look like , and the image isn't showing anything of importance to the article.Funkfrost (talk) 19:10, 30 April 2008 (UTC)