Literature DB >> 26394018

No evidence for feature binding by pigeons in a change detection task.

Olga F Lazareva1, Edward A Wasserman2.   

Abstract

We trained pigeons to respond to one key when two consecutive displays were the same as one another (no-change trial) and to respond to another key when the two displays were different from one another (change trial; change detection task). Change-trial displays were distinguished by a change in all three features (color, orientation, and location) of all four items presented in the display. Pigeons learned this change-no change discrimination to high levels of accuracy. In Experiments 1 and 2, we compared replace trials in which one or two features were replaced by novel features to switch trials in which the features were exchanged among the objects. Pigeons reported both replace and switch trials as "no-change" trials. In contrast, adult humans in Experiment 3 reported both types of trials as "change" trials and showed robust evidence for feature binding. In Experiment 4, we manipulated the total number of objects in the display and the number of objects that underwent change. Unlike people, pigeons showed strong control by the number of feature changes in the second display; pigeons' failure to exhibit feature binding may therefore be attributed to their failure to attend to items in the displays as integral objects.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Binding; Change detection; Variability; Visual short-term memory

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26394018      PMCID: PMC4729622          DOI: 10.1016/j.beproc.2015.09.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Behav Processes        ISSN: 0376-6357            Impact factor:   1.777


  34 in total

1.  The pigeon's variability discrimination with lists of successively presented visual stimuli.

Authors:  M E Young; E A Wasserman; M A Hilfers; R Dalrymple
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process       Date:  1999-10

2.  Storage of features, conjunctions and objects in visual working memory.

Authors:  E K Vogel; G F Woodman; S J Luck
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 3.332

3.  Evidence for a conceptual account of same-different discrimination learning in the pigeon.

Authors:  M E Young; E A Wasserman
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2001-12

4.  The magical number 4 in short-term memory: a reconsideration of mental storage capacity.

Authors:  N Cowan
Journal:  Behav Brain Sci       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 12.579

5.  Same-different conceptualization by baboons (Papio papio): the role of entropy.

Authors:  E A Wasserman; J Fagot; M E Young
Journal:  J Comp Psychol       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 2.231

6.  Discrimination of structure: II. Feature binding.

Authors:  David N George; John M Pearce
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process       Date:  2003-04

7.  Recent advances in operant conditioning technology: a versatile and affordable computerized touchscreen system.

Authors:  Brett M Gibson; Edward A Wasserman; Lloyd Frei; Keith Miller
Journal:  Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput       Date:  2004-05

8.  Pigeon visual short-term memory directly compared to primates.

Authors:  Anthony A Wright; L Caitlin Elmore
Journal:  Behav Processes       Date:  2015-09-03       Impact factor: 1.777

9.  Detecting variety: what's so special about uniformity?

Authors:  Michael E Young; Edward A Wasserman
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  2002-03

10.  Illusory conjunctions in the perception of objects.

Authors:  A Treisman; H Schmidt
Journal:  Cogn Psychol       Date:  1982-01       Impact factor: 3.468

View more
  4 in total

1.  Cognitive flexibility and memory in pigeons, human children, and adults.

Authors:  Kevin P Darby; Leyre Castro; Edward A Wasserman; Vladimir M Sloutsky
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2018-04-06

2.  Properties of iconic and visuospatial working memory in pigeons and humans using a location change-detection procedure.

Authors:  Ken Leising; John Magnotti; Cheyenne Elliott; Jordan Nerz; Anthony Wright
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2022-07-26       Impact factor: 1.926

3.  Systematic Analysis of Pigeons' Discrimination of Pixelated Stimuli: A Hierarchical Pattern Recognition System Is Not Identifiable.

Authors:  Juan D Delius; Julia A M Delius
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-09-26       Impact factor: 4.379

4.  Evidence for object-place binding in pigeons in a sequence-learning procedure.

Authors:  Aaron P Blaisdell; Julia E Schroeder
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2022-04-04       Impact factor: 1.926

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.