Call J. (2004). Inferences about the location of food in the great apes (Pan paniscus, Pan troglodytes, Gorilla gorilla, and Pongo pygmaeus). J. Comp. Psychol., 118(2), 232.
Abstract: Bonobos (Pan paniscus; n = 4), chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes; n = 12), gorillas (Gorilla gorilla; n = 8), and orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus; n = 6) were presented with 2 cups (1 baited) and given visual or auditory information about their contents. Visual information consisted of letting subjects look inside the cups. Auditory information consisted of shaking the cup so that the baited cup produced a rattling sound. Subjects correctly selected the baited cup both when they saw or heard the food. Nine individuals were above chance in both visual and auditory conditions. More important, subjects as a group selected the baited cup when only the empty cup was either shown or shaken, which means that subjects chose correctly without having seen or heard the food (i.e., inference by exclusion). Control tests showed that subjects were not more attracted to noisy cups, avoided shaken noiseless cups, or learned to use auditory information as a cue during the study. It is concluded that subjects understood that the food caused the noise, not simply that the noise was associated with the food. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)
|
Gardner, P. (1937). Responses of horses to the same signal in different positions. J. Comp. Physiol, 23(2), 305–332.
Abstract: The horses were required to differentiate a box containing a black cloth from two associated boxes with no cloth. The correct box contained food. It differed in actual position with respect to the other boxes from trial to trial. After learning had occurred, the position of the cloth signal was changed. The changed positions produced many errors, the number of errors depending upon whether the cloth was higher or lower than the opening of the food box. Retests showed original learning to be relatively stable and unaffected. Factors influencing accuracy of discrimination were: contacts with cloth, position of box with respect to entrance, age of the horse (the younger made fewer errors), and breed and type of horse. There is evidence of some retention after three years. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
|
Hanggi, E. B. (1999). Categorization Learning in Horses (Equus caballus). J. Comp. Psychol., 113(3), 243–252.
Abstract: Categorization learning was investigated in 2 horses (Equus caballus). Both horses learned to select a 2-dimensional black stimulus with an open center instead of a filled stimulus in a 2-choice discrimination task. After a criterion of 10 out of 10 correct responses in a random series for 2 consecutive sessions was reached, 15 additional pairs of open-center versus filled stimuli were tested. Each was run to criterion and then incorporated into sessions of randomly mixed problems. Both horses solved the 1st problem by simple pattern discrimination and showed evidence of categorical processing for subsequent problems. New pairs were learned with few or no errors, and correct responses on novel trials were significantly above chance. These results suggest that the horses were making their selections on the basis of shared characteristics with the training stimuli and were using categorization skills in problem solving.
|
Schwab, C., & Huber, L. (2006). Obey or not obey? Dogs (Canis familiaris) behave differently in response to attentional states of their owners. J Comp Psychol, 120(3), 169–175.
Abstract: Sixteen domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) were tested in a familiar context in a series of 1-min trials on how well they obeyed after being told by their owner to lie down. Food was used in 1/3 of all trials, and during the trial the owner engaged in 1 of 5 activities. The dogs behaved differently depending on the owner's attention to them. When being watched by the owner, the dogs stayed lying down most often and/or for the longest time compared with when the owner read a book, watched TV, turned his or her back on them, or left the room. These results indicate that the dogs sensed the attentional state of their owners by judging observable behavioral cues such as eye contact and eye, head, and body orientation.
|
Soproni, K., Miklósi, Á., Topál, J., & Csányi, V. (2002). Dogs' (Canis familiaris) responsiveness to human pointing gestures. J Comp Psychol, 116(1), 27–34.
Abstract: In a series of 3 experiments, dogs (Canis familiaris) were presented with variations of the human pointing gesture: gestures with reversed direction of movement, cross-pointing, and different arm extensions. Dogs performed at above chance level if they could see the hand (and index finger) protruding from the human body contour. If these minimum requirements were not accessible, dogs still could rely on the body position of the signaler. The direction of movement of the pointing arm did not influence the performance. In summary, these observations suggest that dogs are able to rely on relatively novel gestural forms of the human communicative pointing gesture and that they are able to comprehend to some extent the referential nature of human pointing.
|
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.
|
Pack, A. A., & Herman, L. M. (2004). Bottlenosed Dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) Comprehend the Referent of Both Static and Dynamic Human Gazing and Pointing in an Object-Choice Task. J. Comp. Psychol., 118(2), 160–171.
Abstract: The authors tested 2 bottlenosed dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) for their understanding of human-directed gazing or pointing in a 2-alternative object-choice task. A dolphin watched a human informant either gazing at or pointing toward 1 of 2 laterally placed objects and was required to perform a previously indicated action to that object. Both static and dynamic gaze, as well as static and dynamic direct points and cross-body points, yielded errorless or nearly errorless performance. Gaze with the informant's torso obscured (only the head was shown) produced no performance decrement, but gaze with eyes only resulted in chance performance. The results revealed spontaneous understanding of human gaze accomplished through head orientation, with or without the human informant's eyes obscured, and demonstrated that gaze-directed cues were as effective as point-directed cues in the object-choice task. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2009 APA, all rights reserved)
|
Gosling, S. D. (1998). Personality dimensions in spotted hyenas (Crocuta crocuta). J Comp Psychol, 112(2), 107–118.
Abstract: Personality ratings of 34 spotted hyenas (Crocuta crocuta) were made by 4 observers who knew the animals well. Analyses suggest that (a) hyena personality traits were rated with generally high reliability; (b) 5 broad dimensions (Assertiveness, Excitability, Human-Directed Agreeableness, Sociability, and Curiosity) captured about 75% of the total variance; (c) this dimensional structure could not be explained in terms of dominance status, sex, age, or appearance; and (d) as expected, female hyenas were more assertive than male hyenas. Comparisons with previous research provide evidence for the cross-species generality of Excitability, Sociability, and especially Assertiveness. Discussion focuses on methodological issues in research on animal personality and on the potential contributions this research can make for understanding the biological and environmental bases of personality.
|
Kubinyi, E., Topál, J., Miklósi, Á., & Csányi, V. (2003). Dogs (Canis familiaris) learn their owners via observation in a manipulation task. J. Comp. Psychol., 117(2), 156–165.
Abstract: Eighty-seven pet dogs (Canis familiaris) were involved in an experiment in which they had to solve a task to obtain a ball. After witnessing a full demonstration by their owner (10 times pushing the handle of the box, which released a ball), most dogs preferred to touch the handle sooner and more frequently in comparison with other parts of the box, and they used the handle to get the ball. In contrast dogs in 3 control groups developed their own respective methods. The lack of emergence of the ball and playing after the demonstration did not affect the learning performance strongly. This suggests that in dogs the outcome of a demonstration plays only a restricted role in the manifestation of social learning. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)
|
