Literature DB >> 34619516

The Lords of the Rings: People and pigeons take different paths mastering the concentric-rings categorization task.

Ellen M O'Donoghue1, Matthew B Broschard2, John H Freeman2, Edward A Wasserman2.   

Abstract

COVIS (COmpetition between Verbal and Implicit Systems; Ashby, Alfonso-Reese, & Waldron, 1998) is a prominent model of categorization which hypothesizes that humans have two independent categorization systems - one declarative, one associative - that can be recruited to solve category learning tasks. To date, most COVIS-related research has focused on just two experimental tasks: linear rule-based (RB) tasks, which purportedly encourage declarative rule use, and linear information-integration (II) tasks, which purportedly require associative learning mechanisms. We introduce and investigate a novel alternative: the concentric-rings task, a nonlinear category structure that both humans and pigeons can successfully learn and transfer to untrained exemplars. Yet, despite their broad behavioral similarities, humans and pigeons achieve their successful learning through decidedly different means. As predicted by COVIS, pigeons appear to rely solely on associative learning mechanisms, whereas humans appear to initially test but subsequently reject unidimensional rules. We discuss how variants of our concentric-rings task might yield further insights into which category-learning mechanisms are shared across species, as well as how categorization strategies might change throughout training.
Copyright © 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  COVIS; Categorization; Dimensional learning; Pigeons; Rule formation

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34619516      PMCID: PMC8639790          DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104920

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cognition        ISSN: 0010-0277


  37 in total

1.  Task switching.

Authors:  Stephen Monsell
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 20.229

2.  What's behind different kinds of kinds: effects of statistical density on learning and representation of categories.

Authors:  Heidi Kloos; Vladimir M Sloutsky
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  2008-02

Review 3.  Associative concept learning in animals.

Authors:  Thomas R Zentall; Edward A Wasserman; Peter J Urcuioli
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  2013-10-29       Impact factor: 2.468

Review 4.  What's elementary about associative learning?

Authors:  E A Wasserman; R R Miller
Journal:  Annu Rev Psychol       Date:  1997       Impact factor: 24.137

5.  Due Process in Dual Process: Model-Recovery Simulations of Decision-Bound Strategy Analysis in Category Learning.

Authors:  Charlotte E R Edmunds; Fraser Milton; Andy J Wills
Journal:  Cogn Sci       Date:  2018-03-23

6.  Prototypes in category learning: the effects of category size, category structure, and stimulus complexity.

Authors:  J P Minda; J D Smith
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 3.051

7.  A neural interpretation of exemplar theory.

Authors:  F Gregory Ashby; Luke Rosedahl
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2017-04-06       Impact factor: 8.934

8.  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

Review 9.  Implicit and explicit categorization: a tale of four species.

Authors:  J David Smith; Mark E Berg; Robert G Cook; Matthew S Murphy; Matthew J Crossley; Joseph Boomer; Brian Spiering; Michael J Beran; Barbara A Church; F Gregory Ashby; Randolph C Grace
Journal:  Neurosci Biobehav Rev       Date:  2012-09-11       Impact factor: 8.989

10.  Pigeons proficiently switch among four tasks without cost.

Authors:  Ellen O'Donoghue; Edward A Wasserman
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Anim Learn Cogn       Date:  2021-04       Impact factor: 2.478

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.