Abstract
The mirror mark test has encouraged a binary view of self-awareness according to which a few species possess this capacity whereas others do not. Given how evolution works, however, we need a more gradualist model of the various ways in which animals construe a self and respond to mirrors. The recent study on cleaner wrasses (Labroides dimidiatus) by Kohda and colleagues highlights this need by presenting results that, due to ambiguous behavior and the use of physically irritating marks, fall short of mirror self-recognition. The study suggests an intermediate level of mirror understanding, closer to that of monkeys than hominids.
Highlights
The mirror mark test has encouraged a binary view of self-awareness according to which a few species possess this capacity whereas others do not
mirror self-recognition (MSR) requires that the mirror test (a) be applied only when social reactions to the mirror have been replaced by self-directed behavior, such as testing the contingency between one’s own movements and those of one’s reflection, (b) involve a purely visual mark, and (c) be done without previous training, least of all training of responses indicative of self-recognition
The study controls for this possibility by having sham marks without the color, which indicate that the tactile sensation alone cannot explain the fish’s behavior in front of the mirror
Summary
The mirror mark test has encouraged a binary view of self-awareness according to which a few species possess this capacity whereas others do not. This is why we hardly need a mark test to realize that apes connect their reflection with their own body (Fig 1).
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
