Article

Effect of small cue-response separation on pattern discrimination in macaques (Macaca fuscata and M. mulatta).

Kinki University, Ōsaka, Ōsaka, Japan
Journal of Comparative Psychology (Impact Factor: 2.31). 07/1986; 100(2):137-42. DOI: 10.1037//0735-7036.100.2.137
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT In order to elucidate the nature of the effect of small cue-response separations on pattern discriminations by monkeys, three studies were performed. When training on a pattern discrimination with a cue-response separation was discontinued during performance at the chance level, there was no saving on the rate of learning a second task (with identical cues but a different cue-response separation) relative to the performance of naive control animals. By contrast, when training was discontinued at a performance level a little better than chance, there was significant saving on learning a second task. After learning the second task, a third task with new pattern cues was learned, with marked saving on the duration of performance at the chance level. The results indicate that during the initial stage of performance at the chance level, monkeys do not attend to cues if there is even a small separation between the cue and the response site.

0 Followers
 · 
63 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In the current study, we examined the planning abilities of rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta) by training them on a five-item list composed of coloured photographs and then testing them on switch and mask trials. In contrast to previous studies where monkeys made responses using a joystick, in the current study, monkeys made responses directly to a touch screen. On switch trials, after a response to the first list item, the on-screen positions of two list items were exchanged. Performance on trials in which the second and third list items were exchanged was poorer compared to normal (non-switch) trials for all subjects. When the third and fourth items were exchanged, however, only one subject continued to show performance deficits. On mask trials, following a response to the first item, the remaining items were covered by opaque white squares. When two items were masked, all four subjects responded to each masked item at a level significantly above chance. When three items were masked, however, only one subjected was able to respond to all three masked items at a level significantly above chance. The results of the present study indicate that three of our four monkeys planned one response ahead while a single monkey planned two responses ahead. The significance of these findings is discussed in relation to previous studies on planning in chimpanzees and monkeys.
    Animal Cognition 12/2010; 14(3):317-24. DOI:10.1007/s10071-010-0365-2 · 2.63 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Animal learning studies reveal that locating the reward cue (discriminative stimulus positively correlated with the presentation of positive reinforcement) at the site of the response manipulandum (object contacted in performing the instrumental response), an arrangement referred to as CAM (cue and manipulandum), induces excessive instrumental responding. CAM induces excessive responding even when responding is negatively related to reinforcement and serves only to delay or cancel reinforcement, revealing that excessive responding induced by CAM is unrestrainable and compulsive. In addition, the response form induced by CAM resembles patterns of consummatory behaviors. Thus, animal learning studies reveal that CAM induces excessive and compulsive appetitive-consummatory responding that is triggered by objects predictive of rewarding substances. The CAM model defines conditions under which the drug-taking implement the response manipulandum at which instrumental drug-taking behavior is directed) will contribute to the development of excessive and compulsive drug-taking in humans. Implementassisted drug-taking procedures in humans provide for CAM whenever the drug-taking implement is positively correlated with the drug's reinforcing effects. This correlation is highest when the drug-taking implement is employed only to consume the drug and the drug is consumed in no other fashion. Evidence relating drug-taking implements to drug abuse is reviewed and implications for prevention and therapy are considered.
    Clinical Psychology Review 01/1995; 15(3-15):145-167. DOI:10.1016/0272-7358(95)00005-A · 7.18 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: With a three-choice instrumental discrimination procedure, pigeons were taught to distinguish small spherical objects from nonspherical objects. Spherical objects were defined as positive, nonspherical objects as negative. A device allowing an automatic presentation of the stimuli was employed. The subjects actually pecked the objects, and grain rewards were presented directly beside the correct objects. Acquisition was rapid, with the birds reaching a criterion of 80% correct choices within less than 150 trials. There was evidence that more than 200 objects were remembered individually over 3 months. Pigeons transferred the discrimination of spherical/nonspherical objects to novel objects. The criteria by which the birds judged the sphericity of objects seemed to be similar to those applied by humans. They could apply the categorization in a relational manner and generalize it to apply to photographs and drawings of objects. The categorization competence was retained for at least 3 months.
    Learning & Behavior 09/1992; 20(3):301-311. DOI:10.3758/BF03213385 · 1.48 Impact Factor