The study of things I have never seen.

Area of Science:

• Ethology
• Animal Behavior
• Behavioral Ecology

Background:

• Classical ethology defines structure as an organism's momentary state, reserving interpretation for 'why' questions.
• The study of behavior is inherently mentalistic, requiring inference for concepts like learning, intention, and selective pressures.
• A long-standing debate exists between restricting science to observables and incorporating professional judgment.

Purpose of the Study:

• To explore the challenges of studying complex behaviors like aggression and dominance when direct observation is limited.
• To evaluate the utility of indirect methods, including inference, logic, computer simulations, and expert ratings, in behavioral research.
• To reconcile the limitations of direct observation with the need for rich interpretation in understanding animal behavior.

Main Methods:

• The study relies on inference and interpretation rather than solely direct observation of behaviors like aggression.
• It proposes the use of computer simulations and colleague ratings as supplementary data collection methods.
• Logical deduction and powerful theories are employed to examine intervening variables.

Main Results:

• Direct observation of abstract behavioral concepts like aggression, intention, or awareness of functional outcomes is not possible.
• Indirect methods, such as computer simulations and expert impressions, can provide useful "new data" for behavioral analysis.
• Despite the utility of indirect methods, there is an acknowledged loss of direct experiential data from observing animals.

Conclusions:

• Studying complex behaviors necessitates a reliance on inference and interpretation, moving beyond purely observable actions.
• In an era of potential extinction, innovative approaches like simulations and expert judgment are valuable for behavioral research.
• While indirect methods offer insights, the value of direct observation, even when interpreted, remains significant.