Literature DB >> 3367100

Spontaneous transfer of matching by infant chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes).

D L Oden1, R K Thompson, D Premack.   

Abstract

Four infant chimpanzees learned a matching-to-sample task when only two training stimuli were used. They then spontaneously transferred the matching concept to novel items, including three-dimensional objects and fabric swatches, without any experimenter-provided differential feedback. These results support the view that the matching concept is broadly construed by chimpanzees from the beginning and does not depend upon explicit training.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1988        PMID: 3367100

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process        ISSN: 0097-7403


  32 in total

1.  Use of number by crows: investigation by matching and oddity learning.

Authors:  A A Smirnova; O F Lazareva; Z A Zorina
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 2.468

2.  Transfer of pigeons' matching to sample to novel sample locations.

Authors:  K M Lionello-DeNolf; P J Urcuioli
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 2.468

3.  Stimulus control topographies and tests of symmetry in pigeons.

Authors:  Karen M Lionello-DeNolf; Peter J Urcuioli
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 2.468

4.  Emergent identity matching after successive matching training, I: reflexivity or generalized identity.

Authors:  Peter J Urcuioli
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 2.468

5.  Emergent identity matching after successive matching training. II: Reflexivity or transitivity.

Authors:  Peter J Urcuioli; Melissa Swisher
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 2.468

6.  Two-item same-different concept learning in pigeons.

Authors:  Aaron P Blaisdell; Robert G Cook
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 1.986

7.  Identity matching-to-sample with olfactory stimuli in rats.

Authors:  Tracy Peña; Raymond C Pitts; Mark Galizio
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 2.468

8.  Successive odor matching- and non-matching-to-sample in rats: A reversal design.

Authors:  Katherine Bruce; Katherine Dyer; Michael Mathews; Catharine Nealley; Tiffany Phasukkan; Ashley Prichard; Mark Galizio
Journal:  Behav Processes       Date:  2017-07-13       Impact factor: 1.777

9.  Individual differences: either relational learning or item-specific learning in a same/different task.

Authors:  L Caitlin Elmore; Anthony A Wright; Jacquelyne J Rivera; Jeffrey S Katz
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 1.986

10.  Learning strategies in matching to sample: if-then and configural learning by pigeons.

Authors:  Jeffrey S Katz; Kent D Bodily; Anthony A Wright
Journal:  Behav Processes       Date:  2007-11-09       Impact factor: 1.777

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.