Abstract Reactive individuals explore and make decisions more slowly than proactive individuals, paying more attention to external cues. Reactive personality types are therefore predicted to make fewer mistakes in cognitive tasks, especially in tests of inhibitory control and reversal learning that require individuals to adjust behavioral routines. However, empirical evidence for this is mixed, and work relating cognition to a broader set of phenotypic traits has been called for. Here, using the common waxbill ( Estrilda astrild ), we relate performance in a cognitive assay, the detour-reaching task, to differences in personality, while controlling for putative confounding factors (including sex, breath rate, body size, and mass). Contrary to theoretical predictions, we found that proactive individuals, rather than reactive, made fewer mistakes in the detour-reaching task. We used body size and mass as proxies for condition, but neither predicted personality type or cognitive performance, thus providing no support for the hypothesis that condition dependence mediates the association between proactive personality and detour-reaching performance. This work adds to a growing number of studies contributing conflicting findings on how animal personality relates to cognitive performance, which, together, appear to require novel theory and more nuanced predictions. Significance statement Theory predicts that reactive personality types (i.e., slower-acting and more attentive individuals) should perform better on cognitive tasks that involve inhibiting a response to an irrelevant stimulus to reach food (inhibitory control). Tests of this hypothesis have generated contradictory results and studies that account for confounding factors are needed. We quantified performance in an inhibitory control assay among common waxbills ( Estrilda astrild ), while controlling for the largest set of confounding factors to date. Contrary to predictions, waxbills with a reactive personality made more mistakes in the cognitive assay. These and other recent findings suggest that a more nuanced theory on the relation between cognition and personality is necessary.

中文翻译：

---

积极主动的普通蜡嘴鸟在认知分析中犯的错误更少，这是绕道而行的任务

摘要 反应型个体比主动型个体探索和做出决策的速度更慢，更关注外部线索。因此，预计反应性人格类型在认知任务中犯的错误较少，特别是在需要个人调整行为惯例的抑制控制和逆转学习的测试中。然而，这方面的经验证据是混合的，需要将认知与更广泛的表型特征相关联的工作。在这里，我们使用普通的蜡嘴鸟 ( Estrilda astrild )，将认知分析中的表现、绕路任务与性格差异联系起来，同时控制假定的混杂因素（包括性别、呼吸频率、体型和质量）。与理论预测相反，我们发现主动的个体，而不是被动的，在迂回任务中犯的错误更少。我们使用身体大小和质量作为条件的代理，但没有预测人格类型或认知表现，因此不支持条件依赖性介导主动人格和绕道到达性能之间关联的假设。这项工作增加了越来越多关于动物个性如何与认知表现相关的相互矛盾的研究结果，这些研究似乎需要新颖的理论和更细致的预测。意义陈述理论预测，反应性人格类型（即行动较慢和注意力更集中的个体）应该在涉及抑制对不相关刺激的反应以获取食物（抑制控制）的认知任务中表现更好。对这一假设的检验产生了相互矛盾的结果，需要对混杂因素进行研究。我们量化了常见蜡嘴鸟 ( Estrilda astrild ) 抑制控制试验中的性能，同时控制了迄今为止最大的一组混杂因素。与预测相反，具有反应性人格的蜡嘴鸟在认知分析中犯了更多错误。这些和其他最近的发现表明，有必要对认知和人格之间的关系提出更细致的理论。具有反应性人格的蜡像在认知分析中犯了更多错误。这些和其他最近的发现表明，有必要对认知和人格之间的关系提出更细致的理论。具有反应性人格的蜡像在认知分析中犯了更多错误。这些和其他最近的发现表明，有必要对认知和人格之间的关系提出更细致的理论。