“Feature Detection” vs. “Predictive Coding” Models of Plant Behavior

In this article we consider the possibility that plants exhibit anticipatory behavior, a mark of intelligence. If plants are able to anticipate and respond accordingly to varying states of their surroundings, as opposed to merely responding online to environmental contingencies, then such capacity m...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Frontiers in psychology Jg. 7; S. 1505
Hauptverfasser: Calvo, Paco, Baluška, František, Sims, Andrew
Format: Journal Article
Sprache:Englisch
Veröffentlicht: Switzerland Frontiers Media S.A 04.10.2016
Schlagworte:
ISSN:1664-1078, 1664-1078
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:In this article we consider the possibility that plants exhibit anticipatory behavior, a mark of intelligence. If plants are able to anticipate and respond accordingly to varying states of their surroundings, as opposed to merely responding online to environmental contingencies, then such capacity may be in principle testable, and subject to empirical scrutiny. Our main thesis is that adaptive behavior can only take place by way of a mechanism that predicts the environmental sources of sensory stimulation. We propose to test for anticipation in plants experimentally by contrasting two empirical hypotheses: "feature detection" and "predictive coding." We spell out what these contrasting hypotheses consist of by way of illustration from the animal literature, and consider how to transfer the rationale involved to the plant literature.
Bibliographie:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
Reviewed by: Adam Sanborn, University of Warwick, UK; Anthony Trewavas, University of Edinburgh, UK
This article was submitted to Cognitive Science, a section of the journal Frontiers in Psychology
Edited by: Eddy J. Davelaar, Birkbeck, University of London, UK
ISSN:1664-1078
1664-1078
DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01505