Literature DB >> 19929108

A comparative analysis of the categorization of multidimensional stimuli: I. Unidimensional classification does not necessarily imply analytic processing; evidence from pigeons (Columba livia), squirrels (Sciurus carolinensis), and humans (Homo sapiens).

A J Wills1, Stephen E G Lea, Lisa A Leaver, Britta Osthaus, Catriona M E Ryan, Mark B Suret, Catherine M L Bryant, Sue J A Chapman, Louise Millar.   

Abstract

Pigeons (Columba livia), gray squirrels (Sciurus carolinensis), and undergraduates (Homo sapiens) learned discrimination tasks involving multiple mutually redundant dimensions. First, pigeons and undergraduates learned conditional discriminations between stimuli composed of three spatially separated dimensions, after first learning to discriminate the individual elements of the stimuli. When subsequently tested with stimuli in which one of the dimensions took an anomalous value, the majority of both species categorized test stimuli by their overall similarity to training stimuli. However some individuals of both species categorized them according to a single dimension. In a second set of experiments, squirrels, pigeons, and undergraduates learned go/no-go discriminations using multiple simultaneous presentations of stimuli composed of three spatially integrated, highly salient dimensions. The tendency to categorize test stimuli including anomalous dimension values unidimensionally was higher than in the first set of experiments and did not differ significantly between species. The authors conclude that unidimensional categorization of multidimensional stimuli is not diagnostic for analytic cognitive processing, and that any differences between human's and pigeons' behavior in such tasks are not due to special features of avian visual cognition.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19929108     DOI: 10.1037/a0016216

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Comp Psychol        ISSN: 0021-9940            Impact factor:   2.231


  15 in total

1.  Testing analogical rule transfer in pigeons (Columba livia).

Authors:  Muhammad A J Qadri; F Gregory Ashby; J David Smith; Robert G Cook
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2018-11-30

2.  Task switching in rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta) and tufted capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) during computerized categorization tasks.

Authors:  Travis R Smith; Michael J Beran
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Anim Learn Cogn       Date:  2018-05-31       Impact factor: 2.478

3.  The role of category density in pigeons' tracking of relevant information.

Authors:  Cassandra L Sheridan; Leyre Castro; Sol Fonseca; Edward A Wasserman
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2019-09       Impact factor: 1.986

4.  A dimensional summation account of polymorphous category learning.

Authors:  Andy J Wills; Lyn Ellett; Fraser Milton; Gareth Croft; Tom Beesley
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2020-03       Impact factor: 1.986

5.  Feature predictiveness and selective attention in pigeons' categorization learning.

Authors:  Leyre Castro; Edward A Wasserman
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Anim Learn Cogn       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 2.478

6.  Reorientation by features and geometry: Effects of healthy and degenerative age-related cognitive decline.

Authors:  Kevin Leonard; Viktoriya Vasylkiv; Debbie M Kelly
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2020-03       Impact factor: 1.986

7.  Pigeons' categorization may be exclusively nonanalytic.

Authors:  J David Smith; F Gregory Ashby; Mark E Berg; Matthew S Murphy; Brian Spiering; Robert G Cook; Randolph C Grace
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2011-04

8.  Assessing Attention in Category Learning by Animals.

Authors:  Edward A Wasserman; Leyre Castro
Journal:  Curr Dir Psychol Sci       Date:  2021-10-20

9.  Developing representations of compound stimuli.

Authors:  Ingmar Visser; Maartje E J Raijmakers
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2012-03-19

10.  When does diversity trump ability (and vice versa) in group decision making? A simulation study.

Authors:  Shenghua Luan; Konstantinos V Katsikopoulos; Torsten Reimer
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-02-16       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.