Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39913055›Full record

ArticleHistory and philosophy of the life sciences2025

On the prospects of basal cognition research becoming fully evolutionary: promising avenues and cautionary notes.

Alejandro Fábregas-Tejeda, Matthew Sims

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in History and philosophy of the life sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Early transitions in the evolution of cognition.History and philosophy of the life sciences · 2025
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Alejandro Fábregas-TejedaCentre for Logic and Philosophy of Science, Institute of Philosophy, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. alejandro.fabregastejeda@kuleuven.be.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1797-5467
Matthew SimsLeverhulme Centre for the Future of Intelligence, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. ms3174@cam.ac.uk.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2418-9330

Funding

Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek G070122NTWCF TWCF-2020-20539
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The research programme 'basal cognition' adopts an evolutionary perspective for studying biological cognition. This entails investigating possible cognitive processes in 'simple'-often non-neuronal-organisms as a means to discover conserved mechanisms and adaptive capacities underwriting cognition in more complex (neuronal) organisms. However, by pulling in the opposite direction of a tradition that views cognition as something that is unique to neuronal organisms, basal cognition has been met with a fair amount of scepticism by philosophers and scientists. The very idea of approaching cognition by way of investigating the behaviour and underlying mechanisms in, say, bacteria, has been seen as preposterous and harmful to both cognitive science and biology. This paper aims to temper such scepticism to a certain degree by drawing parallels with how the evolution of 'development,' another loaded concept that refers to a not-so-easily definable, contested bundle of phenomena, has been fruitfully approached in Evolutionary Developmental Biology (Evo-Devo). Through this comparison, we identify four promising features of the basal cognition approach. These features suggest that sweeping scepticism may be unwarranted. However, each of them comes with important epistemic cautionary notes that should not be disregarded. By presenting these twofold considerations as potential ways to integrate a fully evolutionary perspective into basal cognition, this paper seeks to provide clarity and direction for the advancement of this research programme.

Indexed as

Biological EvolutionCognitionDevelopmental BiologyAnimalsHumansBasal cognitionCognitive capacitiesDevelopmentEvo-DevoEvolution

Identifiers

PMID39913055
PMCPMC11802611

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.