| Home | << 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 >> |
|
Zentall, T. R. (2005). Selective and divided attention in animals. Behav. Process., 69(1), 1–15.
Abstract: This article reviews some of the research on attentional processes in animals. In the traditional approach to selective attention, it is proposed that in addition to specific response attachments, animals also learn something about the dimension along which the stimuli fall (e.g., hue, brightness, or line orientation). More recently, there has been an attempt to find animal analogs to methodologies originally applied to research with humans. One line of research has been directed to the question of whether animals can locate a target among distracters faster if they are prepared for the presentation of the target (search image and priming). In the study of search image, the target is typically a food item and the cue consists of previous trials on which the same target is presented. In research on priming effects, the cue is typically different from the target but is a good predictor of its occurrence. The study of preattentive processes shows that perceptually, certain stimuli stand out from distracters better than others, depending not only on characteristics of the target relative to the distracters, but also on relations among the distracters. Research on divided attention is examined with the goal of determining whether an animal can process two elements of a compound sample with the same efficiency as one. Taken together, the reviewed research indicates that animals are capable of centrally (not just peripherally) attending to selective aspects of a stimulus display.
|
|
Martin, T. I., & Zentall, T. R. (2005). Post-choice information processing by pigeons. Anim. Cogn., 8(4), 273–278.
Abstract: In a conditional discrimination (matching-to-sample), a sample is followed by two comparison stimuli, one of which is correct, depending on the sample. Evidence from previous research suggests that if the stimulus display is maintained following an incorrect response (the so-called penalty-time procedure), acquisition by pigeons is facilitated. The present research tested the hypothesis that the penalty-time procedure allows the pigeons to review and learn from the maintained stimulus display following an incorrect choice. It did so by including a penalty-time group for which, following an incorrect choice, the sample changed to match the incorrect comparison, thus providing the pigeons with post-choice 'misinformation.' This misinformation group acquired the matching task significantly slower than the standard penalty-time group (that had no change in the sample following an error). Furthermore, acquisition of matching by a control group that received no penalty time fell midway between the other two groups, suggesting that the pigeons did not merely take more care in making choices because of the aversiveness of penalty-time. Thus, it appears that in the acquisition of matching-to-sample, when the stimulus display is maintained following an incorrect choice, the pigeons can review or acquire information from the display. This is the first time that such an effect has been reported for a nonhuman species.
|
|
Zentall, T. R. (2005). Configural/holistic processing or differential element versus compound similarity. Anim. Cogn., 8(2), 141–142.
Abstract: Before accepting a configural or holistic account of visual perception, one should be sure that an analytic (elemental) account does not provide an equal or better explanation of the results. I suggest that when one forms a compound of a color and a line orientation with one element previously trained as an S+ and the other as an S-, the resulting transfer found will depend on the relative salience of the two elements, and most important, the similarity of the compound to each of the training stimuli. Thus, if a line orientation is placed on a colored background (a separable compound), it will appear more like the colored field used in training, and color will control responding. However, if the line itself is colored (an integral compound), the compound will appear more like the line used in training, and line orientation will control responding. Not only does this account do a better job of explaining the data but it is simpler and it is testable.
|
|
DiGian, K. A., Friedrich, A. M., & Zentall, T. R. (2004). Discriminative stimuli that follow a delay have added value for pigeons. Psychon Bull Rev, 11(5), 889–895.
Abstract: Clement, Feltus, Kaiser, and Zentall (2000) reported that pigeons prefer discriminative stimuli that require greater effort (more pecks) to obtain over those that require less effort. In the present experiment, we examined two variables associated with this phenomenon. First, we asked whether delay of reinforcement, presumably a relatively aversive event similar to effort, would produce similar effects. Second, we asked whether the stimulus preference produced by a prior relatively aversive event depends on its anticipation. Anticipation of delay was accomplished by signaling its occurrence. Results indicated that delays can produce preferences similar to those produced by increased effort, but only if the delays are signaled.
|
|
Friedrich, A. M., & Zentall, T. R. (2004). Pigeons shift their preference toward locations of food that take more effort to obtain. Behav. Process., 67(3), 405–415.
Abstract: Although animals typically prefer to exert less effort rather than more effort to obtain food, the present research shows that requiring greater effort to obtain food at a particular location appears to increase the value of that location. In Experiment 1, pigeons' initial preference for one feeder was significantly reduced by requiring 1 peck to obtain food from that feeder and requiring 30 pecks to obtain food from the other feeder. In Experiment 2, a similar decrease in preference was not found when pigeons received reinforcement from both feeders independently of the amount of effort required. These results are consistent with the within-trial contrast effect proposed by in which the relative hedonic value of a reward depends on the state of the animal immediately prior to the reward. The greater the improvement from that prior state the greater the value of the reinforcer.
Keywords: Animals; *Behavior, Animal; *Choice Behavior; Columbidae; *Exertion; *Feeding Behavior; Reward
|
|
Friedrich, A. M., Clement, T. S., & Zentall, T. R. (2004). Functional equivalence in pigeons involving a four-member class. Behav. Process., 67(3), 395–403.
Abstract: Research suggests that animals are capable of forming functional equivalence relations or stimulus classes of the kind usually demonstrated by humans (e.g., the class defined by an object and the word for that object). In pigeons, such functional equivalences are typically established using many-to-one matching-to-sample in which two samples are associated with one comparison stimulus and two different samples are associated with the other. Evidence for the establishment of functional equivalences between samples associated with the same comparison comes from transfer tests. In Experiment 1, we found that pigeons can form a single class consisting of four members (many-to-one matching) when the alternative class has only one member (one-to-one matching). In Experiment 2, we ruled out the possibility that the pigeons acquired the hybrid one-to-one/many-to-one task by developing a single-code/default coding strategy as earlier research suggested that it might. Thus, pigeons can develop a functional class consisting of as many as four members, with the alternative class consisting of a single member.
|
|
Zentall, T. R. (2004). Action imitation in birds. Learn Behav, 32(1), 15–23.
Abstract: Action imitation, once thought to be a behavior almost exclusively limited to humans and the great apes, surprisingly also has been found in a number of bird species. Because imitation has been viewed by some psychologists as a form of intelligent behavior, there has been interest in how it is distributed among animal species. Although the mechanisms responsible for action imitation are not clear, we are now at least beginning to understand the conditions under which it occurs. In this article, I try to identify and differentiate the various forms of socially influenced behavior (species-typical social reactions, social effects on motivation, social effects on perception, socially influenced learning, and action imitation) and explain why it is important to differentiate imitation from other forms of social influence. I also examine some of the variables that appear to be involved in the occurrence of imitation. Finally, I speculate about why a number of bird species, but few mammal species, appear to imitate.
|
|
Zentall, T. R., Weaver, J. E., & Clement, T. S. (2004). Pigeons group time intervals according to their relative duration. Psychon Bull Rev, 11(1), 113–117.
Abstract: In the present research, we asked whether pigeons tended to judge time intervals not only in terms of their absolute value but also relative to a duration from which they must be discriminated (i.e., longer or shorter). Pigeons were trained on two independent temporal discriminations. In one discrimination, sample durations of 2 and 8 sec were associated with, for example, red and green hue comparisons, respectively, and in the other discrimination, sample durations of 4 and 16 sec were associated with vertical and horizontal line comparisons, respectively. If pigeons are trained on a temporal discrimination and tested with intermediate durations, the subjective midpoint typically occurs close to the geometric mean of the two trained values. The 4- and 8-sec values were selected to be the geometric mean of the two values in the other discrimination. When a 4-sec test sample was presented with the comparisons from the 2- and 8-sec discrimination, the pigeons preferred the comparison associated with the shorter sample. Similarly, when an 8-sec test sample was presented with the comparisons from the 4- and 16-sec discrimination, the pigeons preferred the comparison associated with the longer sample. Thus, a relative grouping effect was found. That is, durations that should have produced indifferent choice were influenced by their relative durations (shorter than or longer than the alternative) during training.
|
|
Zentall, T. R., Klein, E. D., & Singer, R. A. (2004). Evidence for detection of one duration sample and default responding to other duration samples by pigeons may result from an artifact of retention-test ambiguity. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process, 30(2), 129–134.
Abstract: S. C. Gaitan and J. T. Wixted (2000) proposed that when pigeons are trained on a conditional discrimination to associate 1 duration sample with 1 comparison and 2 other duration samples with a 2nd comparison, they detect only the single duration, and on trials involving either of the 2 other duration samples, they respond to the other comparison by default. In 2 experiments, the authors show instead that pigeons lend to treat the retention intervals (such as those used by Gaitan and Wixted) as intertrial intervals, and thus, they tend to treat all trials with a delay as 0-s sample trials. The authors tested this hypothesis by showing that divergent retention functions do not appear when the retention interval is discriminably different from the intertrial interval.
|
|
Clement, T. S., & Zentall, T. R. (2003). Choice based on exclusion in pigeons. Psychon Bull Rev, 10(4), 959–964.
Abstract: When humans acquire a conditional discrimination and are given a novel-sample-comparison choice, they often reject a comparison known to be associated with a different sample and choose the alternative comparison by default (or by exclusion). In Experiment 1, we found that if, following matching training, we replaced both of the samples, acquisition took five times longer than if we replaced only one of the samples. Apparently, the opportunity to reject one of the comparisons facilitated the association of the other sample with the remaining comparison. In Experiment 2, we first trained pigeons to treat two samples differently (to associate Sample A with Comparison 1 and Sample B with Comparison 2) and then trained them to associate one of those samples with a new comparison (e.g., Sample A with Comparison 3) and to associate a novel sample (Sample C) with a different, new comparison (Comparison 4). When Sample B then replaced Sample C, the pigeons showed a significant tendency to choose Comparison 4 over Comparison 3. Thus, when given the opportunity, pigeons will choose by exclusion.
|