|
|
Templeton, J. J., Kamil, A. C., & Balda, R. P. (1999). Sociality and social learning in two species of corvids: The pinyon jay (Gymnorhinus cyanocephalus) and the Clark's nutcracker (Nucifraga columbiana). J. Comp. Psychol., 113(4), 450–455.
Abstract: The hypothesis that social learning is an adaptive specialization for social living predicts that social species should learn better socially than they do individually, but that nonsocial species should not exhibit a similar enhancement of performance under social learning conditions. The authors compared individual and social learning abilities in 2 corvid species: the highly social pinyon jay (Gymnorhinus cyanocephalus) and the less social Clark's nutcracker (Nucifraga columbiana). The birds were tested on 2 different tasks under individual and social learning conditions. Half learned a motor task individually and a discrimination task socially; the other half learned the motor task socially and the discrimination task individually. Pinyon jays learned faster socially than they did individually, but nutcrackers performed equally well under both learning conditions. Results support the hypothesis that social learning is an adaptive specialization for social living in pinyon jays. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2007 APA, all rights reserved)
|
|
|
|
Fragaszy, D. M., & Visalberghi E. (1989). Social influences on the acquisition of tool-using behaviors in tufted capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella). J. Comp. Psychol., 103(2), 159–170.
Abstract: To identify behaviors related to acquisition of tool-use in tufted capuchins (Cebus apella), we presented two tool-using tasks to two groups, extending findings by Westergaard and Fragaszy (1987) and Visalberghi (in press). Five Ss learned to use the tools in each task. The primary predictor of success was level of interest in the task. Observation of others at the apparatus did not facilitate exploratory behaviors or contact with the tools in the observers. Most animals performed exploratory behaviors more often when they were at the apparatus alone than when with another, whether or not the other was using a tool. Observers were quick to learn the relationship between another's activities and the appearance of food. We conclude that capuchins do not readily learn about instrumental relations by observation of others or imitate other's acts. Imitation probably plays no role in the spread of novel instrumental behaviors among monkeys. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)
|
|
|
|
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)
|
|
|
|
Pepperberg, I. M., & Brezinsky, M. V. (1991). Acquisition of a relative class concept by an African gray parrot (Psittacus erithacus): discriminations based on relative size. J Comp Psychol, 105(3), 286–294.
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%.
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
