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: 2.34). 07/1986; 100(2):137-42. DOI: 10.1037//0735-7036.100.2.137
Source: PubMed


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.

3 Reads
  • 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 · 1.89 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Responsiveness of single inferotemporal (IT) neurons to a tone as a start or warning signal in each test trial was investigated in monkeys performing visual discrimination of 4 patterns. It was found that the same IT neurons were responsive to both auditory signal and visual discriminanda with different response characteristics from each other. The activity of IT neurons for the auditory signal in the visual discrimination paradigm reflects an engagement process in attention to the visual discriminanda.
    Brain Research 05/1987; 410(1):121-4. DOI:10.1016/S0006-8993(87)80031-8 · 2.84 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Visual discrimination and reversal learning were assessed in young adult (10-12 years old, n = 4) and aged (23-27 years old, n = 5) female rhesus monkeys. Performance was comparable across age groups in many tasks, suggesting that the acquisition of stimulus-reward associations remains largely intact in the aged monkey. Most older subjects, however, required more training than any young animal to learn an initial pattern discrimination. In combination with previous findings from the same groups of monkeys, these data suggest that deficits in attending to the relevant stimulus features in novel testing procedures may contribute to poor performance in aged subjects across a variety of learning and memory tasks. In addition, preliminary findings from a discrimination probe procedure raise the possibility that aged subjects may adopt alternate testing strategies that compensate for some aspects of age-dependent cognitive dysfunction.
    Behavioral Neuroscience 01/1991; 104(6):876-84. DOI:10.1037/0735-7044.104.6.876 · 2.73 Impact Factor
Show more

Similar Publications