Abstract: We report that an African gray parrot (Psittacus erithacus), Alex, responds to stimuli on a relative basis. Previous laboratory studies with artificial stimuli (such as pure tones) suggest that birds make relational responses as a secondary strategy, only after they have acquired information about the absolute values of the stimuli. Alex, however, after learning to respond to a small set of exemplars on the basis of relative size, transferred this behavior to novel situations that did not provide specific information about the absolute values of the stimuli. He responded to vocal questions about which was the larger or smaller exemplar by vocally labeling its color or material, and he responded “none” if the exemplars did not differ in size. His overall accuracy was 78.7%.

Abstract: Domestic fowl were deprived of the opportunity to perform litter-related behaviour for three or four days and were tested in a Y-maze (which they had previously been trained to run) for their ability to associate a coloured cue with gaining access to peat. When the goal boxes were within sight of the choice point, most birds chose peat. However, when the birds had to rely solely on the coloured cue only one bird from 12 showed learning. However, the birds seemed to have some expectation of a reward, as they ran faster if, on the previous trial, they had chosen peat. The inability of the birds to learn the association may have been an artefact of the schedule of deprivation and testing, for when they were hungry and tested in the same way they were again unable to learn an association between the same coloured cue and food reward. The experiment with peat was repeated using “massed” trials (several trials in immediate succession) during training and testing and six from 15 birds showed learning. These results suggest that the initial failure to learn was probably due to the training and testing schedule, that access to peat appears to be rewarding and that hens can learn an association between an abstract cue and a rewarding consequence. This is consistent with the possibility that domestic fowls may have some cognitive representation of peat when it is out of sight.

Abstract: This study replicated an unreported finding observed in a color perception experiment (Pick, Lovell, Brown, & Dail, 1994) where, after using the method of successive approximations to train a blue-gray discrimination, red-gray trials were initiated without further training. Although a gray choice had never been reinforced, the subject chose gray on the first 20 trials (p < .000001). In the study reported here, a horse was trained to approach a red feed bucket and not a green feed bucket. After the subject mastered the discrimination, a blue bucket was substituted for the previously reinforced red bucket. With double-blind controls in place, the subject chose the unreinforced green bucket on 15 out of the first 20 blue-green trials yielding a binomial p = 0.0148 that this outcome could be due to chance alone. These results are contrary to all behavioristic psychological learning theories, but consistent with prospect theory (Kahneman & Tversky, 1979). Prospect theory predicts that given a choice between two previously unreinforced stimuli, one familiar and the other novel, humans will choose the familiar. It is argued that the bias toward the familiar is the basis to a heuristic that has a genetic origin and should exist in other animals on the phylogenetic scale. The results of this study indicate that the heuristic is available at least as far down the scale as the horse. Conceptual replications using shape stimuli and sound stimuli are in progress.

Abstract: Social observational learning is one of learning abilities expected in domestic horses (Equus caballus) because of their ecological and evolutional history. However, a few studies on this type of learning in horses failed to provide clear evidence of observational learning and/or could not distinguished it from other types of learning. We tested interspecific observational learning abilities using the spatial task and a human demonstrator. We hypothesised that 1) horses with possibility of observing a human demonstrator will complete the task in shorter time than control horses without any demonstrator, and 2) horses observing a familiar demonstrator will carry out the task in shorter time than horses with an unfamiliar demonstrator due to established positive human-horse relationship. We randomly allocated 24 riding horses of mixed age and breed to three groups per 8 and started the task either with observing a familiar demonstrator, unfamiliar demonstrator or without demonstrator (control group). Each horse was released individually at the starting point in the experimental paddock and the latency to pass the task was recorded. A horse completed the task once it walked 25 m from the starting point to the squared area (4x4 m) fenced by a tape, went into it through the entrance on the opposite side and touched the bucket with food. Eight people served as demonstrators, each for one familiar and one unfamiliar horse. Horses from groups with a demonstrator, either familiar or unfamiliar, reached the food bucket significantly faster than control horses during the first trial (mean±SE: 29.1±3.13 s with familiar, 28.9±3.13 s unfamiliar and 41.5 ± 3.13 s without demonstrator, P<0.02, GLMM, PROC MIXED, SAS). Horses did not differ in time needed to reach the fence of the squared area, but in “solving time”, i.e. time from reaching the fence of the squared area and touching the bucket (14.6±2.34, 14.3±2.34 and 27.6±2.34 s in horses with familiar, unfamiliar or without demonstrator, P<0.001). Despite our presumption, the horses observing a familiar demonstrator finished the task in comparable time as horses with an unfamiliar demonstrator (P=0.85) which indicated little effect of long lasting positive relationship between a horse and a particular human. We found, however, large individual variability in performance of individual demonstrators. Further, horses did not differ in time needed to pass the same task without a demonstrator repeated either shortly or 7 days after the first test which supported that interspecific observational learning rather than social facilitation occurred. In conclusion, horses with a human demonstrator, regardless familiar or unfamiliar, were able to solve the task in shorter time compared to control horses but they did not differ in performing repeated task if they learned it by individual or social learning process. This indicates that interspecific observational learning does occur in horses. Supported by AWIN, EU FP7 project No. 266213.

Abstract: This study investigated chimpanzees' spontaneous spatial constructions with objects and especially their ability to repeat inter-object spatial relations, which is basic to understanding spatial relations at a higher level than perception or recognition. Subjects were six chimpanzees-four chimpanzees and two bonobos-aged 6-21 years, all raised in a human environment from an early age. Only minor species differences, but considerable individual differences were found. The effect of different object samples was assessed through a comparison with a previous study. A common overall chimpanzee pattern was also found. Chimpanzees repeated different types of inter-object spatial relations such as insertion (I), or vertical (V), or next-to (H) relations. However chimpanzees repeated I or V relations with more advanced procedures than when repeating H relations. Moreover, chimpanzees never repeated combined HV relations. Compared with children, chimpanzees showed a specific difficulty in repeating H relations. Repeating H relations is crucial for representing and understanding multiple reciprocal spatial relations between detached elements and for coordinating independent positions in space. Therefore, the chimpanzees' difficulty indicates a fundamental difference in constructive space in comparison to humans. The findings are discussed in relation to issues of spatial cognition and tool use.