Jordan Dopkins

Researchers working on rodent in maze studies claim that organisms use distal (far) and proximal (near) visual cues differently. I characterize the dominant working definitions researchers use for distal and proximal cues, where distal cues sit beyond an experimental apparatus (like a maze) and proximal cues sit within. Then, I present a problem: the relevant experimental apparatuses are confined to labs and cannot be used to study real-life navigation behaviors like long-distance migration. It follows that the working definitions do not identify difference makers beyond those settings and do not allow for claims about distal and proximal cues to play explanatory or predictive roles for real-life navigation. Despite this, I argue that researchers should continue to treat these as working definitions for concepts that work more generally in natural environments. This calls for some conceptual engineering however, since the more generally useful concepts of “proximal” and “distal” are not well-defined. To remedy this, I present more general, ecologically valid definitions in terms of neural information about visual cues.

In 2014, John O’Keefe was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for his work on the hippocampus and its role in encoding map-like representations. His contributions were significantly influenced by Morris water maze studies. O’Keefe himself acknowledged the pivotal role of the Morris water maze, stating that it remains the preeminent behavioral assay for assessing hippocampal function. Indeed, thousands of researchers have turned to the Morris water maze for evidence about navigation abilities and the effects that stress, lesions, pharmaceutical interventions, and more can have on them. This body of studies constitutes an important scientific enterprise. This dissertation is about some of the philosophical dimensions of Morris water maze studies. Chapter 1 is about the different types of information states (including representational states) found across hypotheses about Morris water maze performance. Chapter 2 is about systematic task failures reported in Morris water maze studies. I argue these impose a constraint on what can count as an explanation (a good hypothesis) of task success. While this has the air of a chopping block for scientific hypotheses, I see things a little differently. In Chapter 3, I argue that satisfying the constraint is a formidable challenge for any hypothesis. One that should make researchers second-guess the concepts and strategies employed to explain the roles information states play in the maze task. Chapter 4 focuses on two spatial concepts. I argue that researchers working definitions for the spatial concepts of distal (far) and proximal (near) in maze studies are problematic. They are not ecologically valid, and so claims about them do not generalize to real-life navigation behaviors like migration or scavenging behaviors. Following this, I present alternative definitions in terms of neural information about visual cues. The neural information relevant to this account is non-conceptual, and so it provides a sketch of the ways in which information states can fruitfully contribute to explanations of rat success and failure while maintaining ecological validity. To sum, this dissertation navigates important philosophical dimensions of Morris water maze studies, illustrating the challenges and opportunities involved in using information states to explain and understand animal navigation.