|
|
von Fersen, L., & Delius, J. D. (2000). Acquired equivalences between auditory stimuli in dolphins (Tursiops truncatus). Anim. Cogn., 3(2), 79–83.
Abstract: This study investigated whether dolphins would show evidence of equivalence class formation between auditory stimuli. Bottlenose dolphins were trained to press one or other of two response levers depending on which one of four auditory stimuli had been previously presented. Once they had learned the initial discriminations, the stimulus-lever contingencies was repeatedly reversed. Within any given session, however, pressing of one lever always led to reward with one set of two tones and pressing the other lever led to non-reward with an alternative set of two tones. After sufficient experience with this response reversal procedure, the dolphins spontaneously chose the same levers they had first learned to be correct with one of the across-set stimulus pairs when later in the session they were presented with the other of the across-set stimulus pairs. They thus demonstrated that they had associated the tones belonging to the two sets within two separate functional classes. It is discussed why the dolphins succeeded with auditory stimuli when they had previously failed in a similar task with visual stimuli.
|
|
|
|
Xia, L., Siemann, M., & Delius, J. D. (2000). Matching of numerical symbols with number of responses by pigeons. Anim. Cogn., 3(1), 35–43.
Abstract: Pigeons were trained to peck a certain number of times on a key that displayed one of several possible numerical symbols. The particular symbol displayed indicated the number of times that the key had to be pecked. The pigeons signalled the completion of the requirement by operating a separate key. They received a food reward for correct response sequences and time-out penalties for incorrect response sequences. In the first experiment nine pigeons learned to allocate 1, 2, 3 or 4 pecks to the corresponding numerosity symbols s1, s2, s3 and s4 with levels of accuracy well above chance. The second experiment explored the maximum set of numerosities that the pigeons were capable of handling concurrently. Six of the pigeons coped with an s1-s5 task and four pigeons even managed an s1-s6 task with performances that were significantly above chance. Analysis of response times suggested that the pigeons were mainly relying on a number-based rather than on a time-based strategy.
|
|
