Abstract: Categorization refers to the classification of perceptual input into defined functional groups. We present and discuss evidence suggesting that stimulus categorization can also be found in an invertebrate, the honeybee Apis mellifera, thus underlining the generality across species of this cognitive process. Honeybees show positive transfer of appropriate responding from a trained to a novel set of visual stimuli. Such a transfer was demonstrated for specific isolated features such as symmetry or orientation, but also for assemblies (layouts) of features. Although transfer from training to novel stimuli can be achieved by stimulus generalization of the training stimuli, most of these transfer tests involved clearly distinguishable stimuli for which generalization would be reduced. Though in most cases specific experimental controls such as stimulus balance and discriminability are still required, it seems appropriate to characterize the performance of honeybees as reflecting categorization. Further experiments should address the issue of which categorization theory accounts better for the visual performances of honeybees.

Abstract: This study explored whether the tendency of chimpanzees and children to use emulation or imitation to solve a tool-using task was a response to the availability of causal information. Young wild-born chimpanzees from an African sanctuary and 3- to 4-year-old children observed a human demonstrator use a tool to retrieve a reward from a puzzle-box. The demonstration involved both causally relevant and irrelevant actions, and the box was presented in each of two conditions: opaque and clear. In the opaque condition, causal information about the effect of the tool inside the box was not available, and hence it was impossible to differentiate between the relevant and irrelevant parts of the demonstration. However, in the clear condition causal information was available, and subjects could potentially determine which actions were necessary. When chimpanzees were presented with the opaque box, they reproduced both the relevant and irrelevant actions, thus imitating the overall structure of the task. When the box was presented in the clear condition they instead ignored the irrelevant actions in favour of a more efficient, emulative technique. These results suggest that emulation is the favoured strategy of chimpanzees when sufficient causal information is available. However, if such information is not available, chimpanzees are prone to employ a more comprehensive copy of an observed action. In contrast to the chimpanzees, children employed imitation to solve the task in both conditions, at the expense of efficiency. We suggest that the difference in performance of chimpanzees and children may be due to a greater susceptibility of children to cultural conventions, perhaps combined with a differential focus on the results, actions and goals of the demonstrator.

Abstract: The present study investigated the influence of temperament on long-term recall and extinction of 2 instrumental tasks in 26 horses. In the first task (backward task), horses learned to walk backward, using commands given by an experimenter, in order to obtain a food reward. In the second task (active avoidance task), horses had to cross an obstacle after a bell rang in order to avoid emission of an air puff. Twenty-two months after acquisition, horses exhibited perfect recall performance in both tasks. Accordingly, no influence of temperament on recall performance could be observed for either task. In contrast, in the absence of positive or negative outcomes, the horses’ ability to extinguish their response to either task was highly variable. Resistance to extinction was related to some indicators of temperament: The most fearful horses tended to be the most resistant to extinction in the backward task, while the least sensitive horses tended to be the most resistant to extinction in the active avoidance task. These findings reveal extensive long-term memory abilities in horses and suggest an influence of temperament on learning processes other than acquisition.

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.

Abstract: Rats were exposed to a radial maze containing six black smooth arms and six wire-grid-covered arms and a striped 'exit arm' in experiment 1. The probability of a black or grid arm being baited (5/6 vs 1/6) with sunflower seeds was associated with its proximal cue for some rats (the Relevant Arm Cue group) but not for others (the Irrelevant Arm Cue group). All rats could terminate a trial and receive a highly preferred morsel of apple by entering the exit arm only after having sampled all six seed-baited arms. Relevant Arm Cue rats usually chose some arms from the more densely baited set before choosing an arm from the less densely baited set and made fewer reentries than Irrelevant Arm Cue rats. Although such clustered, higher choice accuracy in the Relevant Arm Cue group corresponds to human clustered, better recall of verbal items from lists hierarchically organized by categories, these rats did not similarly exhaustively retrieve items (arm locations). That is, when required to terminate a trial by entering the 'exit' arm for an apple morsel after having sampled all seed-baited arms, both groups were equally unable to withhold making nonrewarded premature exits. This nonexhaustive foraging search pattern was maintained in the next two experiments in which the radial maze was reduced to three black and three grid arms along with the striped 'exit' arm and in which black and grid arm cues were paired with number of seeds (eight or one) in an arm for Relevant Arm Cue rats. Although Relevant Arm Cue rats displayed perfect clustering by entering all eight-seeded arms before a one-seeded arm, they made more premature exits and reentries into eight-seeded arms in experiment 2 or when forced to enter all eight-seeded arms in experiment 3 than did Irrelevant Arm Cue rats. These foraging tendencies prevent accurate estimations of the amount of information (i.e., arm locations) rats can 'chunk'.