| |
Records |
Links |
|
Author |
Méary, D.; Li, Z.; Li, W.; Guo, K.; Pascalis, O. |
|
| |
Title |
Seeing two faces together: preference formation in humans and rhesus macaques |
Type |
Journal Article |
| |
Year |
2014 |
Publication |
|
Abbreviated Journal |
Animal Cognition |
|
| |
Volume |
|
Issue |
|
Pages |
1-13 |
|
| |
Keywords |
Humans; Rhesus macaques; Preferences; Faces; Eye-tracking |
|
| |
Abstract  |
Humans, great apes and old world monkeys show selective attention to faces depending on conspecificity, familiarity, and social status supporting the view that primates share similar face processing mechanisms. Although many studies have been done on face scanning strategy in monkeys and humans, the mechanisms influencing viewing preference have received little attention. To determine how face categories influence viewing preference in humans and rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta), we performed two eye-tracking experiments using a visual preference task whereby pairs of faces from different species were presented simultaneously. The results indicated that viewing time was significantly influenced by the pairing of the face categories. Humans showed a strong bias towards an own-race face in an Asian–Caucasian condition. Rhesus macaques directed more attention towards non-human primate faces when they were paired with human faces, regardless of the species. When rhesus faces were paired with faces from Barbary macaques (Macaca sylvanus) or chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes), the novel species’ faces attracted more attention. These results indicate that monkeys’ viewing preferences, as assessed by a visual preference task, are modulated by several factors, species and dominance being the most influential. |
|
| |
Address |
|
|
| |
Corporate Author |
|
Thesis |
|
|
| |
Publisher |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
Place of Publication |
|
Editor |
|
|
| |
Language |
English |
Summary Language |
|
Original Title |
|
|
| |
Series Editor |
|
Series Title |
|
Abbreviated Series Title |
|
|
| |
Series Volume |
|
Series Issue |
|
Edition |
|
|
| |
ISSN |
1435-9448 |
ISBN |
|
Medium |
|
|
| |
Area |
|
Expedition |
|
Conference |
|
|
| |
Notes |
|
Approved |
no |
|
| |
Call Number |
Equine Behaviour @ team @ |
Serial |
5790 |
|
| Permanent link to this record |
| |
|
| |
|
Author |
Scheider, L.; Kaminski, J.; Call, J.; Tomasello, M. |
|
| |
Title |
Do domestic dogs interpret pointing as a command? |
Type |
Journal Article |
| |
Year |
2013 |
Publication |
|
Abbreviated Journal |
Animal Cognition |
|
| |
Volume |
16 |
Issue |
3 |
Pages |
361-372 |
|
| |
Keywords |
Communication; Domestic dog; Pointing; Comprehension; Imperative |
|
| |
Abstract |
Domestic dogs comprehend human gestural communication flexibly, particularly the pointing gesture. Here, we examine whether dogs interpret pointing informatively, that is, as simply providing information, or rather as a command, for example, ordering them to move to a particular location. In the first study a human pointed toward an empty cup. In one manipulation, the dog either knew or did not know that the designated cup was empty (and that the other cup actually contained the food). In another manipulation, the human (as authority) either did or did not remain in the room after pointing. Dogs ignored the human’s gesture if they had better information, irrespective of the authority’s presence. In the second study, we varied the level of authority of the person pointing. Sometimes this person was an adult, and sometimes a young child. Dogs followed children’s pointing just as frequently as they followed adults’ pointing (and ignored the dishonest pointing of both), suggesting that the level of authority did not affect their behavior. Taken together these studies suggest that dogs do not see pointing as an imperative command ordering them to a particular location. It is still not totally clear, however, if they interpret it as informative or in some other way. |
|
| |
Address |
|
|
| |
Corporate Author |
|
Thesis |
|
|
| |
Publisher |
Springer-Verlag |
Place of Publication |
|
Editor |
|
|
| |
Language |
English |
Summary Language |
|
Original Title |
|
|
| |
Series Editor |
|
Series Title |
|
Abbreviated Series Title |
|
|
| |
Series Volume |
|
Series Issue |
|
Edition |
|
|
| |
ISSN |
1435-9448 |
ISBN |
|
Medium |
|
|
| |
Area |
|
Expedition |
|
Conference |
|
|
| |
Notes |
|
Approved |
no |
|
| |
Call Number |
Equine Behaviour @ team @ |
Serial |
5666 |
|
| Permanent link to this record |
| |
|
| |
|
Author |
Abramson, J.Z.; Hernández-Lloreda, V.; Call, J.; Colmenares, F. |
|
| |
Title |
Experimental evidence for action imitation in killer whales (Orcinus orca) |
Type |
Journal Article |
| |
Year |
2013 |
Publication |
|
Abbreviated Journal |
Animal Cognition |
|
| |
Volume |
16 |
Issue |
1 |
Pages |
11-22 |
|
| |
Keywords |
Social learning; Imitation; ‘Do-as-other-does’ test; Animal culture; Killer whales |
|
| |
Abstract |
Comparative experimental studies of imitative learning have focused mainly on primates and birds. However, cetaceans are promising candidates to display imitative learning as they have evolved in socioecological settings that have selected for large brains, complex sociality, and coordinated predatory tactics. Here we tested imitative learning in killer whales, Orcinus orca. We used a ‘do-as-other-does’ paradigm in which 3 subjects witnessed a conspecific demonstrator’s performance that included 15 familiar and 4 novel behaviours. The three subjects (1) learned the copy command signal ‘Do that’ very quickly, that is, 20 trials on average; (2) copied 100 % of the demonstrator’s familiar and novel actions; (3) achieved full matches in the first attempt for 8–13 familiar behaviours (out of 15) and for the 2 novel behaviours (out of 2) in one subject; and (4) took no longer than 8 trials to accurately copy any familiar behaviour, and no longer than 16 trials to copy any novel behaviour. This study provides experimental evidence for body imitation, including production imitation, in killer whales that is comparable to that observed in dolphins tested under similar conditions. These findings suggest that imitative learning may underpin some of the group-specific traditions reported in killer whales in the field. |
|
| |
Address |
|
|
| |
Corporate Author |
|
Thesis |
|
|
| |
Publisher |
Springer-Verlag |
Place of Publication |
|
Editor |
|
|
| |
Language |
English |
Summary Language |
|
Original Title |
|
|
| |
Series Editor |
|
Series Title |
|
Abbreviated Series Title |
|
|
| |
Series Volume |
|
Series Issue |
|
Edition |
|
|
| |
ISSN |
1435-9448 |
ISBN |
|
Medium |
|
|
| |
Area |
|
Expedition |
|
Conference |
|
|
| |
Notes |
|
Approved |
no |
|
| |
Call Number |
Equine Behaviour @ team @ |
Serial |
5695 |
|
| Permanent link to this record |
| |
|
| |
|
Author |
Komárková, M.; Bartošová, J. |
|
| |
Title |
Lateralized suckling in domestic horses (Equus caballus) |
Type |
Journal Article |
| |
Year |
2013 |
Publication |
|
Abbreviated Journal |
Animal Cognition |
|
| |
Volume |
16 |
Issue |
3 |
Pages |
343-349 |
|
| |
Keywords |
Domestic horse; Foal; Suckling; Lateralization |
|
| |
Abstract |
Brain lateralization enables preferential processing of certain stimuli and more effective utilization of these stimuli in either the left or the right cerebral hemisphere. Horses show both motor and sensory lateralization patterns. Our aim was to determine whether a lateralized response could be detected in foals during the naturally side-biased behaviour, suckling. The foals’ preferred suckling side could be the effect of either visual or motor lateralization. In the case of a visual lateralized response, foals are expected to suck more often from the mother’s right side, so potential danger can be detected by the better adapted right hemisphere (i.e. left eye). Motor lateralization can be identified when a foal will suck predominantly from one side, either left or right. We found no population trend in the preferred suckling side, but we detected significant differences amongst individual foals. One-third (35.4 %) of 79 foals showed a strong, either right or left side preference which increased with age. The mothers did not influence the foals’ suckling side preferences either by side-biased rejection or termination of suckling. According to our findings, a general pattern of sucking with the left eye open for better danger detection and recognition is unlikely in foals up to 7 months old. Foals of this age are probably young or fully focused on suckling and rely on their mothers’ vigilance. Individual side preferences amongst foals are suggested to be based on motor lateralization. |
|
| |
Address |
|
|
| |
Corporate Author |
|
Thesis |
|
|
| |
Publisher |
Springer-Verlag |
Place of Publication |
|
Editor |
|
|
| |
Language |
English |
Summary Language |
|
Original Title |
|
|
| |
Series Editor |
|
Series Title |
|
Abbreviated Series Title |
|
|
| |
Series Volume |
|
Series Issue |
|
Edition |
|
|
| |
ISSN |
1435-9448 |
ISBN |
|
Medium |
|
|
| |
Area |
|
Expedition |
|
Conference |
|
|
| |
Notes |
|
Approved |
no |
|
| |
Call Number |
Equine Behaviour @ team @ |
Serial |
5664 |
|
| Permanent link to this record |
| |
|
| |
|
Author |
Horn, L.; Range, F.; Huber, L. |
|
| |
Title |
Dogs’ attention towards humans depends on their relationship, not only on social familiarity |
Type |
Journal Article |
| |
Year |
2013 |
Publication |
|
Abbreviated Journal |
Animal Cognition |
|
| |
Volume |
16 |
Issue |
3 |
Pages |
435-443 |
|
| |
Keywords |
Domestic dogs; Social attention; Social familiarity; Dog–human relationship |
|
| |
Abstract |
Both in humans and non-human animals, it has been shown that individuals attend more to those they have previously interacted with and/or they are more closely associated with than to unfamiliar individuals. Whether this preference is mediated by mere social familiarity based on exposure or by the specific relationship between the two individuals, however, remains unclear. The domestic dog is an interesting subject in this line of research as it lives in the human environment and regularly interacts with numerous humans, yet it often has a particularly close relationship with its owner. Therefore, we investigated how long dogs (Canis familiaris) would attend to the actions of two familiar humans and one unfamiliar experimenter, while varying whether dogs had a close relationship with only one or both familiar humans. Our data provide evidence that social familiarity by itself cannot account for dogs’ increased attention towards their owners since they only attended more to those familiar humans with whom they also had a close relationship. |
|
| |
Address |
|
|
| |
Corporate Author |
|
Thesis |
|
|
| |
Publisher |
Springer-Verlag |
Place of Publication |
|
Editor |
|
|
| |
Language |
English |
Summary Language |
|
Original Title |
|
|
| |
Series Editor |
|
Series Title |
|
Abbreviated Series Title |
|
|
| |
Series Volume |
|
Series Issue |
|
Edition |
|
|
| |
ISSN |
1435-9448 |
ISBN |
|
Medium |
|
|
| |
Area |
|
Expedition |
|
Conference |
|
|
| |
Notes |
|
Approved |
no |
|
| |
Call Number |
Equine Behaviour @ team @ |
Serial |
5667 |
|
| Permanent link to this record |
| |
|
| |
|
Author |
Kaminski, J.; Pitsch, A.; Tomasello, M. |
|
| |
Title |
Dogs steal in the dark |
Type |
Journal Article |
| |
Year |
2013 |
Publication |
|
Abbreviated Journal |
Animal Cognition |
|
| |
Volume |
16 |
Issue |
3 |
Pages |
385-394 |
|
| |
Keywords |
Domestic dog; Social cognition; Perspective taking; Competition |
|
| |
Abstract |
All current evidence of visual perspective taking in dogs can possibly be explained by dogs reacting to certain stimuli rather than understanding what others see. In the current study, we set up a situation in which contextual information and social cues are in conflict. A human always forbade the dog from taking a piece of food. The part of the room being illuminated was then varied, for example, either the area where the human was seated or the area where the food was located was lit. Results show that dogs steal significantly more food when it is dark compared to when it is light. While stealing forbidden food the dog’s behaviour also depends on the type of illumination in the room. Illumination around the food, but not the human, affected the dogs’ behaviour. This indicates that dogs do not take the sight of the human as a signal to avoid the food. It also cannot be explained by a low-level associative rule of avoiding illuminated food which dogs actually approach faster when they are in private. The current finding therefore raises the possibility that dogs take into account the human’s visual access to the food while making their decision to steal it. |
|
| |
Address |
|
|
| |
Corporate Author |
|
Thesis |
|
|
| |
Publisher |
Springer-Verlag |
Place of Publication |
|
Editor |
|
|
| |
Language |
English |
Summary Language |
|
Original Title |
|
|
| |
Series Editor |
|
Series Title |
|
Abbreviated Series Title |
|
|
| |
Series Volume |
|
Series Issue |
|
Edition |
|
|
| |
ISSN |
1435-9448 |
ISBN |
|
Medium |
|
|
| |
Area |
|
Expedition |
|
Conference |
|
|
| |
Notes |
|
Approved |
no |
|
| |
Call Number |
Equine Behaviour @ team @ |
Serial |
5669 |
|
| Permanent link to this record |
