The observation that science is influenced by politics has often been noted, but the details as to how, by whom, and to what ends, differ so much from case to case that the theme remains interesting. During the cold war it was, usually, physics and chemistry, occasionally mathematics, whose directions were thought to be influenced by political pressures (Snow, 1961). Biology came into prominence with the Vietnam War, and interest in an array of biological weapons, from defoliants to nerve gaseslikewise influenced a great deal of research. If one's memory goes back to earlier times, one also recalls the relations that developed between psychology and the politics of immigration and education, which had a  lasting impact on developments in the study of intelligence (Gould, 1981). Nor have the politics of religion been irrelevant (Durant, 1985).

Animal behavior studies of the 19th century were characterized by an appeal to anthropomorphic attitudes, which were resolutely challenged beginning with the start of the 20th century, particularly by the forerunners of what became the behaviorist school. The ethological school founded by Tinbergen and Lorenz also rejected appeals to human-like cognitive abilities. In the l970s, under the leadership of the physiologist, Donald Griffin, animal cognition was again admitted into “respectable” ethological company, leading to a strong critique by another eminent physiologist, John Kennedy. (The influence of Tolman had previously made many comparative psychologists receptive to this possibility). Recent studies based upon developments on direct recordings of brain activity now suggest that Tolman and Griffin’s prescience will carry the day.

Pekin ducklings (Anas platyrhynckos) were exposed either to a white or harlequin duck model. When tested for their preferences with both models simultaneously present, the harlequin was more often preferred. If tested in the presence of another strange object (a stuffed barn owl, Tytus alba), the harlequin-trained ducklings more often deviated from chosing their training model than did the white-trained ducks, i.e., a reversal of effects. Apparently, the context of the test interacts with the characteristics of the model in a way that confounds predictions.