|
Kurtzman H.S., Church R.M., & Crystal J.D. (2002). Data archiving for animal cognition research: Report of an NIMH workshop. Animal Learning & Behavior, 30, 405–412.
|
|
|
Singer, R. A., Klein, E. D., & Zentall, T. R. (2006). Use of a single-code/default strategy by pigeons to acquire duration sample discriminations. Learn Behav, 34(4), 340–347.
Abstract: Past evidence that pigeons may adopt a single-code/default strategy to solve duration sample discriminations may be attributable to the similarity between the intertrial interval (ITI) and the retention interval. The present experiments tested whether pigeons would adopt a single-code/default strategy when possible ITI-retention-interval ambiguity was eliminated and sample salience was increased. Previous studies of duration sample discriminations that have purported to show evidence for the use of a single-code/default coding strategy have used durations of 0, 2, and 10 sec (Zentall, Klein, and Singer, 2004). However, the results of Experiment 1 suggest that the use of a 0-sec sample may produce an artifact resulting in inadvertent present/absent sample matching. In Experiment 2, when pigeons were trained with three nonzero duration samples (2, 8, and 32 sec), clear evidence for the use of a single-code/default strategy was found.
|
|
|
Gibson, B. M., Juricevic, I., Shettleworth, S. J., Pratt, J., & Klein, R. M. (2005). Looking for inhibition of return in pigeons. Learn Behav, 33(3), 296–308.
Abstract: We conducted four experiments in order to investigate whether pigeons' responses to a recently attended (i.e., recently pecked) location are inhibited. In Experiments 1 and 2, stimulus displays were similar to those used in studies of inhibition of return (IOR) with humans; responses to cued targets tended to be facilitated rather than inhibited. In Experiments 3 and 4, birds were presented with stimulus displays that mimicked clusters of small grains and were relatively localized, which should have been more appropriate for detecting IOR in pigeons. The results from these experiments again provided evidence for facilitation of responding to cued targets, rather than for IOR.
|
|
|
Akins, C. K., Klein, E. D., & Zentall, T. R. (2002). Imitative learning in Japanese quail (Coturnix japonica) using the bidirectional control procedure. Anim Learn Behav, 30(3), 275–281.
Abstract: In the bidirectional control procedure, observers are exposed to a conspecific demonstrator responding to a manipulandum in one of two directions (e.g., left vs. right). This procedure controls for socially mediated effects (the mere presence of a conspecific) and stimulus enhancement (attention drawn to a manipulandum by its movement), and it has the added advantage of being symmetrical (the two different responses are similar in topography). Imitative learning is demonstrated when the observers make the response in the direction that they observed it being made. Recently, however, it has been suggested that when such evidence is found with a predominantly olfactory animal, such as the rat, it may result artifactually from odor cues left on one side of the manipulandum by the demonstrator. In the present experiment, we found that Japanese quail, for which odor cues are not likely to play a role, also showed significant correspondence between the direction in which the demonstrator and the observer push a screen to gain access to reward. Furthermore, control quail that observed the screen move, when the movement of the screen was not produced by the demonstrator, did not show similar correspondence between the direction of screen movement observed and that performed by the observer. Thus, with the appropriate control, the bidirectional procedure appears to be useful for studying imitation in avian species.
|
|
|
SYLVAIN GAGNON, F. R. A. N. C. O. I. S. Y. D. O. R. E. (1993). Search behavior of dogs (Canis familiaris) in invisible displacement problems. Anim Learn. & Behav., 21(3), 246–254.
Abstract: Gagnon and Dor (1992) showed that domestic dogs are able to solve a Piagetian object permanence
task called the invisible displacement problem. A toy is hidden in a container which is
moved behind a screen where the toy is removed and left. Dogs make more errors in these problems
than they do in visible displacement tests, in which the object is hidden directly behind
the target screen. In Experiment 1, we examinedcomponents ofthe standard procedure of invisible
displacements that may make encoding or retention of the hiding location more difficult than
it is in visible displacements. In Experiment 2, we compared dogs performances in visible and
invisible displacement problems when delays of 0, 10, and 20 sec were introduced between the
objects final disappearance and the subjects release. The results revealed that dogs poorer performance
in invisible displacement tests is related to the complex sequence of events that have
to be encoded or remembered as well as to a difficulty in representing the position change that
is signaled, but not directly perceived.
|
|
|
Gibson, B. M., & Shettleworth, S. J. (2003). Competition among spatial cues in a naturalistic food-carrying task. Learn Behav, 31(2), 143–159.
Abstract: Rats collected nuts from a container in a large arena in four experiments testing how learning about a beacon or cue at a goal interacts with learning about other spatial cues (place learning). Place learning was quick, with little evidence of competition from the beacon (Experiments 1 and 2). Rats trained to approach a beacon regardless of its location were subsequently impaired when the well-learned beacon was removed and other spatial cues identified the location of the goal (Experiment 3). The competition between beacon and place cues reflected learned irrelevance for place cues (Experiment 4). The findings differ from those of some studies of associative interactions between cue and place learning in other paradigms.
|
|
|
Doré, F. Y., Fiset, S., Goulet, S., Dumans, M. - C., & Gagnon, S. (1996). Search behavior in cats and dogs Interspecific differences in working memory and spatial cognition. Anim Learn. & Behav., 24(2), 142–149.
Abstract: Cats and dogs search behavior was compared in different problems where an object was visibly
moved behind a screen that was then visibly moved to a new position. In Experiments 1 (cats) and 2 (dogs),
one group was tested with identical screens and the other group was tested with dissimilar screens.
Results showed that in both species, search behavior was based on processing of spatial information
rather than on recognition of the visual features of the target screen. Cats and dogs were unable to find
the object by inferring its invisible movement. They reached a high level of success only if there was
direct perceptual evidence that the object could not be at its initial position. When the position change
was indicated by an indirect cue, cats searched more at the object`s initial than final position, whereas
dogs searched equally at both positions. Interspecific similarities and differences are interpreted in
terms of the requirements for resetting working memory.
|
|
|
Griffin A.S.,. (2004). Social learning about predators: A review and prospectus. Learn. Behav., 32, 131–140.
Abstract: In comparison with social learning about food, social learning about predators has received little attention. Yet such research is of potential interest to students of animal cognition and conservation biologists. I summarize evidence for social learning about predators by fish, birds, eutherian mammals, and marsupials. I consider the proposal that this phenomenon is a case of S-S classical conditioning and suggest that evolution may have modified some of the properties of learning to accommodate for the requirements of learning socially about danger. I discuss some between-species differences in the properties of socially acquired predator avoidance and suggest that learning may be faster and more robust in species in which alarm behavior reliably predicts high predatory threat. Finally, I highlight how studies of socially acquired predator avoidance can inform the design of prerelease antipredator training programs for endangered species.
|
|
|
White, D. J. (2004). Influences of social learning on mate-choice decisions. Learn. Behav., 32, 105–113.
Abstract: Evidence from both field and laboratory is consistent with the hypothesis that animals can acquire mate preferences by observing the mating behavior of others. It is difficult, however, to distinguish social learning about mates from a host of other social effects on mating that do not produce changes in preferences. Examples are drawn from laboratory studies on mate choice in female and male Japanese quail that illustrate ways in which social cues influence mating decisions. Quail of both sexes use social cues to modify their mate choices, but the sexes use the information to serve different purposes. Female quail gain preferences for males seen mating with other females, whereas males avoid females that they had observed mating with other males. This sex difference in social learning provides an example of how costs and benefits of sexual behavior can shape decision-making processes. Implications of the influence of social learning on sexual selection are briefly discussed.
|
|
|
Reader S.M.,. (2004). Distinguishing social and asocial learning using diffusion dynamics. Learn. Behav., 32, 90–104.
Abstract: Theoretical models predict that the cumulative number of individuals displaying a socially learned novel behavior will follow an accelerating pattern over time, whereas asocial processes have been associated with linear or decelerating functions. This raises the possibility that the shape of the diffusion curve may reveal something about the learning processes involved. If true, this would be particularly useful for identifying social transmission in observational field studies. Published data are reviewed and are found to provide limited support for this view. The use of accelerating curves as a diagnostic is challenging because (1) alternative theoretical models make similar predictions, (2) clear supporting empirical data are lacking, and (3) practical considerations frequently make accurate construction of the diffusion curve difficult.
|
|