References 81states of consciousness. At a personal level, I fully believe
that those animals have a consciousness that is similar to
mine in at least some respects. However, despite the protes-
tations of Griffin, I see no “windows on the mind” that will
enable us to draw such conclusions in any scientifically
meaningful way.
Throughout its history, comparative psychology has been
a basic science, concerned with generating general principles
rather than solving problems for immediate application. Nev-
ertheless, many comparative studies have produced infor-
mation of practical import. Primates trained to manipulate
joysticks and other manipulanda have been used in the space
program. Targeted research has been directed at a range of
problems from controlling the tree snakes on Guam (Chiszar,
1990) to designing more challenging environments for cap-
tive zoo animals (Markowitz, 1982) to training animals for
reintroduction into their natural habitats (e.g., Beck & Castro,
1994). Comparative psychologists have been concerned with
the psychological well-being of primates in research labora-
tories (e.g., Novak & Suomi, 1988) and the use of therapy
to treat behavioral problems in household pets (Tuber,
Hothersall, & Voith, 1974).
The major paradox of comparative psychology is that it is
basically the study of nonhumananimal mind and behavior
within a discipline that is often defined as the study of the
humanmind and behavior. This issue was laid out near the
beginning of the last century by Wilhelm Wundt (1901), who
contrasted research conducted for its own sake with that con-
ducted to shed light on human behavior. In the latter ap-
proach, Wundt suggested, “man is only considered as one,
though, of course, the highest, of developmental stages to be
examined” (p. 340). Near the middle of the century, Beach
(1960) put it differently:
If we remove man from the central point in a comparative sci-
ence of behavior, this may, in the long run, prove to be the very
best way of reaching a better understanding of his place in nature
and of the behavioral characteristics which he shares with other
animals as well as those which he possesses alone or which are
in him developed to a unique degree. (p. 18)REFERENCES
Aberle, S. D., & Corner, G. W. (1953). Twenty-five years of sex
research: History of the National Research Council Committee
for Research in Problems of Sex 1922–1947. Philadelphia:
Saunders.
Angell, J. R. (1905, January). Recent scientific contributions to social
welfare: Contemporary psychology.Chatauquan,453–459.
Aronson, L. R., Tobach, E., Rosenblatt, J. S., & Lehrman, D. S. (Eds.).
(1969).Selected writings of T. C. Schneirla.San Francisco:
Freeman.
Baldwin, J. M. (1896). A new factor in evolution. American
Naturalist, 30,536–553.
Beach, F. A. (1950). The snark was a boojum. American Psycholo-
gist, 5,115–124.
Beach, F. A. (1955). The descent of instinct. Psychological Review,
62,401–410.
Beach, F. A. (1960). Experimental investigations of species-specific
behavior. American Psychologist, 15,1–18.
Beauchamp, G. K., Yamazaki, K., & Boyse, E. A. (1985). The
chemosensory recognition of genetic individuality. Scientific
American, 253(1), 86–92.
Beck, B. B., & Castro, M. I. (1994). Environments for endangered
primates. In E. F. Gibbons Jr., E. J. Wyers, E. Waters, & E.
Menzel (Eds.), Naturalistic environments in captivity for animal
behavior research(pp. 259–270). Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
Beer, C. G. (1975). Was Professor Lehrman an ethologist? Animal
Behaviour, 23,957–964.
Bitterman, M. E. (1965). The evolution of intelligence. Scientific
American, 212(1), 92–100.
Boakes, R. (1984). From Darwin to behaviourism.Cambridge,
England: Cambridge University Press.
Boring, E. G. (1912). Note on the negative reaction under light-
adaptation in the planarian. Journal of Animal Behavior, 2,
229–248.
Cadwallader, T. C. (1984). Neglected aspects of the evolution of
American comparative and animal psychology. In G. Greenberg
& E. Tobach (Eds.), Behavioral evolution and integrative levels
(pp. 15–48). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Call, J., & Tomasello, M. (1994). Production and comprehension of
referential pointing by orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus).Journal of
Comparative Psychology, 108,307–317.
Carpenter, C. R. (1934). A field study of the behavioral and social
relations of howling monkeys (Alouatta palliata).Comparative
Psychology Monographs, 10(48), 1–168.
Chiszar, D. A. (1990). The behavior of the brown tree snake: A study
in applied comparative psychology. In D. A. Dewsbury (Ed.),
Contemporary issues in comparative psychology(pp. 101–123).
Sunderland, MA: Sinauer.
Coburn, C. A., & Yerkes, R. M. (1915). A study of the behavior of
the crow Corvus americanusAud. by the multiple choice
method.Journal of Animal Behavior, 5,75–114.
Cole, L. W. (1910). Reactions of frogs to chlorides of sodium,
potassium, ammonium, and lithium. Journal of Comparative
Neurology and Psychology, 20,601–614.
Conradi, E. (1905). Song and call-notes of English sparrows
when reared by canaries. American Journal of Psychology, 16,
190–198.
Cosm ides, L., & Tooby, J. (1987). From evolution to behavior:
Evolutionary psychology as the missing link. In J. Dupré (Ed.),