Literature DB >> 12507003

Categorizing a moving target in terms of its speed, direction, or both.

Walter T Herbranson1, Thane Fremouw, Charles P Shimp.   

Abstract

Pigeons categorized a moving target in terms of its speed and direction in an adaptation of the randomization procedure used to study human categorization behavior (Ashby & Maddox, 1998). The target moved according to vectors that were sampled with equal probabilities from two slightly overlapping bivariate normal distributions with the dimensions of speed and direction. On the average, pigeons categorized optimally in that they attended to either speed or direction alone, or divided attention between them, as was required by different reinforcement contingencies. Decision bounds were estimated for individual pigeons for each attentional task. Average slopes and y intercepts of these individually estimated decision bounds closely approximated the corresponding values for optimal decision bounds. There is therefore at least one task in which pigeons, on the average, display flexibility and quantitative precision in allocating attention to speed and direction when they categorize moving targets.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12507003      PMCID: PMC1284899          DOI: 10.1901/jeab.2002.78-249

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav        ISSN: 0022-5002            Impact factor:   2.468


  22 in total

1.  Cognitive precedence for local information in hierarchical stimulus processing by pigeons.

Authors:  K K Cavoto; R G Cook
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process       Date:  2001-01

2.  Behavior as a social construction.

Authors:  C P. Shimp
Journal:  Behav Processes       Date:  2001-05-03       Impact factor: 1.777

3.  Effects of ectostriatal lesions on natural concept, pseudoconcept, and artificial pattern discrimination in pigeons.

Authors:  S Watanabe
Journal:  Vis Neurosci       Date:  1991-05       Impact factor: 3.241

4.  Motion as a natural category for pigeons: Generalization and a feature-positive effect.

Authors:  W H Dittrich; S E Lea
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1993-01       Impact factor: 2.468

5.  Topography of the food-reinforced key peck and the source of 30-millisecond interresponse times.

Authors:  R F Smith
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1974-05       Impact factor: 2.468

6.  Detection of the velocity of movement of visual stimuli by pigeons?

Authors:  W Hodos; L Smith; J C Bonbright
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1976-03       Impact factor: 2.468

7.  The pigeon's discrimination of movement patterns (Lissajous figures) and contour-dependent rotational invariance.

Authors:  J Emmerton
Journal:  Perception       Date:  1986       Impact factor: 1.490

8.  The spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian paradigm: a critique of the adaptationist programme.

Authors:  S J Gould; R C Lewontin
Journal:  Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  1979-09-21

9.  Comparing frontal and lateral viewing in the pigeon. II. Velocity thresholds for movement discrimination.

Authors:  C Martinoya; S Rivaud; S Bloch
Journal:  Behav Brain Res       Date:  1983-06       Impact factor: 3.332

10.  A local mechanism for differential velocity detection.

Authors:  S P McKee
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1981       Impact factor: 1.886

View more
  7 in total

1.  Are birds smarter than mathematicians? Pigeons (Columba livia) perform optimally on a version of the Monty Hall Dilemma.

Authors:  Walter T Herbranson; Julia Schroeder
Journal:  J Comp Psychol       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 2.231

2.  Development of implicit and explicit category learning.

Authors:  Cynthia L Huang-Pollock; W Todd Maddox; Sarah L Karalunas
Journal:  J Exp Child Psychol       Date:  2011-03-05

3.  Toward the Unification of Molecular and Molar Analyses.

Authors:  Charles P Shimp
Journal:  Behav Anal       Date:  2013

4.  Decision making by humans in a behavioral task: do humans, like pigeons, show suboptimal choice?

Authors:  Mikael Molet; Holly C Miller; Jennifer R Laude; Chelsea Kirk; Brandon Manning; Thomas R Zentall
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 1.986

5.  "Artificial grammar learning" in pigeons: a preliminary analysis.

Authors:  Walter T Herbranson; Charles P Shimp
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 1.986

6.  Learning how to "make a deal": human (Homo sapiens) and monkey (Macaca mulatta) performance when repeatedly faced with the Monty Hall Dilemma.

Authors:  Emily D Klein; Theodore A Evans; Natasha B Schultz; Michael J Beran
Journal:  J Comp Psychol       Date:  2012-07-02       Impact factor: 2.231

7.  Walking like an ant: a quantitative and experimental approach to understanding locomotor mimicry in the jumping spider Myrmarachne formicaria.

Authors:  Paul S Shamble; Ron R Hoy; Itai Cohen; Tsevi Beatus
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2017-07-12       Impact factor: 5.349

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.