|
|
Vallortigara, G., Chiandetti, C., & Sovrano, V. A. (2011). Brain asymmetry (animal). WIREs Cogn Sci, 2(2), 146–157.
Abstract: Once considered a uniquely human attribute, brain asymmetry has been proved to be ubiquitous among non-human animals. A synthetic review of evidence of animal lateralization in the motor, sensory, cognitive, and affective domains is provided, together with a discussion of its development and possible biological functions. It is argued that investigation of brain asymmetry in a comparative perspective may favor the link between classical neuropsychological studies and modern developmental and evolutionary biology approaches. WIREs Cogni Sci 2011 2 146–157 DOI: 10.1002/wcs.100 For further resources related to this article, please visit the WIREs website
|
|
|
|
Quaranta, A., Siniscalchi, M., & Vallortigara, G. (2007). Asymmetric tail-wagging responses by dogs to different emotive stimuli. In Current biology : CB (Vol. 17, pp. R199–R201). Cell Press.
|
|
|
|
Siniscalchi, M., Lusito, R., Vallortigara, G., & Quaranta, A. (2013). Seeing Left- or Right-Asymmetric Tail Wagging Produces Different Emotional Responses in Dogs. Curr Biol, 23(22).
Abstract: Summary Left-right asymmetries in behavior associated with asymmetries in the brain are widespread in the animal kingdom [1], and the hypothesis has been put forward that they may be linked to animals’ social behavior [2, 3]. Dogs show asymmetric tail-wagging responses to different emotive stimuli [4]—the outcome of different activation of left and right brain structures controlling tail movements to the right and left side of the body. A crucial question, however, is whether or not dogs detect this asymmetry. Here we report that dogs looking at moving video images of conspecifics exhibiting prevalent left- or right-asymmetric tail wagging showed higher cardiac activity and higher scores of anxious behavior when observing left- rather than right-biased tail wagging. The finding that dogs are sensitive to the asymmetric tail expressions of other dogs supports the hypothesis of a link between brain asymmetry and social behavior and may prove useful to canine animal welfare theory and practice.
|
|
|
|
Regolin, L., Tommasi, L., & Vallortigara, G. (2000). Visual perception of biological motion in newly hatched chicks as revealed by an imprinting procedure. Anim. Cogn., 3(1), 53–60.
Abstract: Day-old chicks were exposed to point-light animation sequences depicting either a walking hen or a rotating cylinder. On a subsequent free-choice test (experiment 1) the chicks approached the novel stimulus, irrespective of this being the hen or the cylinder. In order to obtain equivalent local motion vectors, in experiments 2 and 3 newly hatched chicks were exposed either to a point-light animation sequence depicting a walking hen, or to a positionally scrambled walking hen (i.e. an animation in which exactly the same set of dots in motion as that employed for the walking hen was presented, but with spatially randomized starting positions). Chicks tested on day 1 (experiment 2) or on day 2 (i.e. after a period in the dark following exposure on day 1 (experiment 3)) proved able to discriminate the two animation sequences: males preferentially approached the novel stimulus, females the familiar one. These results indicate that discrimination was not based on local motion vectors, but rather on the temporally integrated motion sequence.
|
|
|
|
Vallortigara, G., Regolin, L., Rigoni, M., & Zanforlin, M. (1998). Delayed search for a concealed imprinted object in the domestic chick. Anim. Cogn., 1(1), 17–24.
Abstract: Five-day-old chicks were accustomed to follow an imprinted object (a small red ball with which they had been reared) that was moving slowly in a large arena, until it disappeared behind an opaque screen. In experiments, each chick was initially confined in a transparent cage, from where it could see and track the ball while it moved towards, and then beyond, one of two screens. The screens could be either identical or differ in colour and pattern. Either immediately after the disappearance of the ball, or with a certain delay, the chick was released and allowed to search for its imprinted object behind either screen. The results showed that chicks took into account the directional cue provided by the ball movement and its concealment, up to a delay period of about 180 s, independently of the perceptual characteristics of the two screens. If an opaque partition was positioned in front of the transparent cage immediately after the ball had disappeared, so that, throughout the delay, neither the goal-object nor the two screens were visible, chicks were still capable of remembering and choosing the correct screen, though over a much shorter period of about 60 s. The results suggest that, at least in this precocial bird species, very young chicks can maintain some form of representation of the location where a social partner was last seen, and are also capable of continuously updating this representation so as to take into account successive displacements of the goal-object.
|
|
