| Home | [1–10] << 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 >> |
|
Slater, P., Rosenblatt, J., Snowdon, C., & Roper, T. (2001). ADVANCES IN THE STUDY OF BEHAVIOR, 31 (Vol. 31). ACADEMIC PRESS.
Abstract: Description
The aim of Advances in the Study of Behavior remains as it has been since the series began: to serve the increasing number of scientists who are engaged in the study of animal behavior by presenting their theoretical ideas and research to their colleagues and to those in neighboring fields. We hope that the series will continue its “contribution to the development of the field”, as its intended role was phrased in the Preface to the first volume in 1965. Since that time, traditional areas of animal behavior have achieved new vigor by the links they have formed with related fields and by the closer relationship that now exists between those studying animal and human subjects. Advances in the Study of Behavior, Volume 31 continues to serve scientists across a wide spectrum of disciplines. Focusing on new theories and research developments with respect to behavioral ecology, evolutionary biology, and comparative psychology, these volumes foster cooperation and communications in these dense fields. Audience Experimental psychologists studying animal behavior, comparative psychologists, ethologists, evolutionary biologists, and ichthyologists. Contents Contributors. Preface.M.L. East and H. Hofer, Conflict and Co-operation in a Female Dominated Society: A Re-assessment of the “Hyper-aggressive” Image of Spotted Hyenas.C. ten Cate, H. Slabbekoorn, and M.R. Ballintijn, Bird Song and Male-male Competition: Causes and Consequences of Vocal Variability in the Collared Dove (Streptopelia Decaocto).R.W. Byrne, Imitation of Novel Complex Actions: What Does the Evidence from Animals Mean?L.J. Rogers, Lateralization in Vertebrates: Its Early Evolution, General Pattern and Development.S.H. Hulse, Auditory Scene Analysis in Animal Communication.P.K. Stoddard, Electric Signals: Predation, Sex, and Environmental Constraints.T. Aubin and P. Jouventin, How to Vocally Identify Kin in a Crowd: The Penguin Model. Index. Contents of Previous Volumes. |
|
Bolhuis, J. J., & Macphail, E. M. (2001). A critique of the neuroecology of learning and memory. Trends. Cognit. Sci., 5(10), 426–433.
Abstract: Recent years have seen the emergence of neuroecology, the study of the neural mechanisms of behaviour guided by functional and evolutionary principles. This research has been of enormous value for our understanding of the evolution of brain- and species-specific behaviour. However, we question the validity of the neuroecological approach when applied to the analysis of learning and memory, given its arbitrary assumption that different [`]problems' engage different memory mechanisms. Differences in memory-based performance in [`]natural' tasks do not prove differences in memory capacity; similarly, differences in the use of memory in the natural environment do not provide a sound basis for expecting differences in anatomical structures that subserve learning and memory. This critique is illustrated with examples taken from the study of the neurobiology of food storing and song learning in birds.
|
|
Biegler, R., McGregor, A., Krebs, J. R., & Healy, S. D. (2001). A larger hippocampus is associated with longer-lasting spatial memory. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A., 98(12), 6941–6944.
Abstract: Volumetric studies in a range of animals (London taxi-drivers, polygynous male voles, nest-parasitic female cowbirds, and a number of food-storing birds) have shown that the size of the hippocampus, a brain region essential to learning and memory, is correlated with tasks involving an extra demand for spatial learning and memory. In this paper, we report the quantitative advantage that food storers gain from such an enlargement. Coal tits () a food-storing species, performed better than great tits (), a nonstoring species, on a task that assessed memory persistence but not on a task that assessed memory resolution or on one that tested memory capacity. These results show that the advantage to the food-storing species associated with an enlarged hippocampus is one of memory persistence.
|
|
Macphail, E. M., & Boldhuis, J. J. (2001). The evolution of intelligence: adaptive specializations versusgeneral process. Biological Reviews, 76(3), 341–364.
Abstract: Darwin argued that between-species differences in intelligence were differences of degree, not of kind. The contemporary ecological approach to animal cognition argues that animals have evolved species-specific and problem-specific processes to solve problems associated with their particular ecological niches: thus different species use different processes, and within a species, different processes are used to tackle problems involving different inputs. This approach contrasts both with Darwin's view and with the general process view, according to which the same central processes of learning and memory are used across an extensive range of problems involving very different inputs. We review evidence relevant to the claim that the learning and memory performance of non-human animals varies according to the nature of the stimuli involved. We first discuss the resource distribution hypothesis, olfactory learning-set formation, and the 'biological constraints' literature, but find no convincing support from these topics for the ecological account of cognition. We then discuss the claim that the performance of birds in spatial tasks of learning and memory is superior in species that depend heavily upon stored food compared to species that either show less dependence upon stored food or do not store food. If it could be shown that storing species enjoy a superiority specifically in spatial (and not non-spatial) tasks, this would argue that spatial tasks are indeed solved using different processes from those used in non-spatial tasks. Our review of this literature does not find a consistent superiority of storing over non-storing birds in spatial tasks, and, in particular, no evidence of enhanced superiority of storing species when the task demands are increased, by, for example, increasing the number of items to be recalled or the duration of the retention period. We discuss also the observation that the hippocampus of storing birds is larger than that of non-storing birds, and find evidence contrary to the view that hippocampal enlargement is associated with enhanced spatial memory; we are, however, unable to suggest a convincing alternative explanation for hippocampal enlargement. The failure to find solid support for the ecological view supports the view that there are no qualitative differences in cognition between animal species in the processes of learning and memory. We also argue that our review supports our contention that speculation about the phylogenetic development and function of behavioural processes does not provide a solid basis for gaining insight into the nature of those processes. We end by confessing to a belief in one major qualitative difference in cognition in animals: we believe that humans alone are capable of acquiring language, and that it is this capacity that divides our intelligence so sharply from non-human intelligence.
|
|
Soproni, K., Miklósi, A., Topál, J., & Csányi, V. (2001). Comprehension of human communicative signs in pet dogs (Canis familiaris). J Comp Psychol, 115(2), 122–126.
Abstract: On the basis of a study by D. J. Povinelli, D. T. Bierschwale, and C. G. Cech (1999), the performance of family dogs (Canis familiaris) was examined in a 2-way food choice task in which 4 types of directional cues were given by the experimenter: pointing and gazing, head-nodding (“at target”), head turning above the correct container (“above target”), and glancing only (“eyes only”). The results showed that the performance of the dogs resembled more closely that of the children in D. J. Povinelli et al.'s study, in contrast to the chimpanzees' performance in the same study. It seems that dogs, like children, interpret the test situation as being a form of communication. The hypothesis is that this similarity is attributable to the social experience and acquired social routines in dogs because they spend more time in close contact with humans than apes do, and as a result dogs are probably more experienced in the recognition of human gestures.
|
|
Hostetter, A. B., Cantero, M., & Hopkins, W. D. (2001). Differential use of vocal and gestural communication by chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) in response to the attentional status of a human (Homo sapiens). J. Comp. Psychol., 115(4), 337–343.
Abstract: This study examined the communicative behavior of 49 captive chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes), particularly their use of vocalizations, manual gestures, and other auditory- or tactile-based behaviors as a means of gaining an inattentive audience's attention. A human (Homo sapiens) experimenter held a banana while oriented either toward or away from the chimpanzee. The chimpanzees' behavior was recorded for 60 s. Chimpanzees emitted vocalizations faster and were more likely to produce vocalizations as their 1st communicative behavior when a human was oriented away from them. Chimpanzees used manual gestures more frequently and faster when the human was oriented toward them. These results replicate the findings of earlier studies on chimpanzee gestural communication and provide new information about the intentional and functional use of their vocalizations.
|
|
Itakura, S., Agnetta, B., Hare, B., & Tomasello, M. (2001). Chimpanzee Use of Human and Conspecific Social Cues to Locate Hidden Food. Dev Sci, 2(2), 448–456.
Abstract: Two studies are reported in which chimpanzees attempted to use social cues to locate hidden food in one of two possible hiding places. In the first study four chimpanzees were exposed to a local enhancement cue (the informant approached and looked to the location where food was hidden and then remained beside it) and a gaze/point cue (the informant gazed and manually pointed towards the location where the food was hidden). Each cue was given by both a human informant and a chimpanzee informant. In the second study 12 chimpanzees were exposed to a gaze direction cue in combination with a vocal cue (the human informant gazed to the hiding location and produced one of two different vocalizations – a 'food-bark' or a human word-form). The results were – (i) all subjects were quite skillful with the local enhancement cue, no matter who produced it; (ii) few subjects were skillful with the gaze/point cue, no matter who produced it (most of these being individuals who had been raised in infancy by humans); and (iii) most subjects were skillful when the human gazed and vocalized at the hiding place, with little difference between the two types of vocal cue. Findings are discussed in terms of chimpanzees' apparent need for additional cues, over and above gaze direction cues, to indicate the presence of food.
|
|
Rizzolatti, G., Fogassi, L., & Gallese, V. (2001). Neurophysiological mechanisms underlying the understanding and imitation of action. Nat Rev Neurosci, 2(9), 661–670.
Abstract: What are the neural bases of action understanding? Although this capacity could merely involve visual analysis of the action, it has been argued that we actually map this visual information onto its motor representation in our nervous system. Here we discuss evidence for the existence of a system, the ‘mirror system’, that seems to serve this mapping function in primates and humans, and explore its implications for the understanding and imitation of action.
|
|
Kasuya, E. (2001). Mann-Whitney U test when variances are unequal. Anim. Behav., 61(6), 1247–1249.
|
|
Harris, L. J., Almerigi, J. B., Carbary, T. J., & Fogel, T. G. (2001). Left-side infant holding: A test of the hemispheric arousal -attentional hypothesis. Brain and Cognition, 46(1-2), 159–165.
Abstract: When asked to hold a young infant in their arms, most adults hold on the left side (Harris, 1997). In a prior study, we found the same bias when we asked adults merely to imagine holding an infant in their arms (Harris, Almerigi, & Kirsch, 1999). It has been hypothesized that the left-side bias is the product of right-hemisphere arousal accompanying certain aspects of the act, causing attention to be driven to the contralateral, or left, side of personal space. Left-side holding, whether actual or imagined, thus would be consistent with the direction to which the holder's attention has been endogenously directed. We tested this hypothesis by giving 250 college students the “imagine-holding” task and then, as an independent measure of lateralized hemispheric arousal, a 34-item Chimeric Faces Test (CFT). On the “imagine” test, a significant majority reported a left-side hold, and, on the CFT, left-side holders had a significantly stronger left-hemispace bias than right-side holders, although both left- and right- side holders had left-hemispace CFT biases. The results thus support the attentional-arousal hypothesis but indicate that other factors are contributing as well.
|