• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

大猩猩(黑猩猩、红毛猩猩、倭黑猩猩、大猩猩)在反向奖励 contingency 任务 II 中的表现:向新数量的转移、长期保持以及数量比率的影响。

How the great apes (Pan troglodytes, Pongo pygmaeus, Pan paniscus, Gorilla gorilla) perform on the reversed reward contingency task II: transfer to new quantities, long-term retention, and the impact of quantity ratios.

作者信息

Uher Jana, Call Josep

机构信息

Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Leipzig, Germany.

出版信息

J Comp Psychol. 2008 May;122(2):204-12. doi: 10.1037/0735-7036.122.2.204.

DOI:10.1037/0735-7036.122.2.204
PMID:18489236
Abstract

We tested 6 chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes), 3 orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus), 4 bonobos (Pan paniscus), and 2 gorillas (Gorilla gorilla) in the reversed reward contingency task. Individuals were presented with pairs of quantities ranging between 0 and 6 food items. Prior to testing, some experienced apes had solved this task using 2 quantities while others were totally naïve. Experienced apes transferred their ability to multiple-novel pairs after 6 to 19 months had elapsed since their initial testing. Two out of 6 naïve apes (1 chimpanzee, 1 bonobo) solved the task--a proportion comparable to that of a previous study using 2 pairs of quantities. Their acquisition speed was also comparable to the successful subjects from that study. The ratio between quantities explained a large portion of the variance but affected naïve and experienced individuals differently. For smaller ratios, naïve individuals were well below 50% correct and experienced ones were well above 50%, yet both groups tended to converge toward 50% for larger ratios. Thus, some apes require no procedural modifications to overcome their strong bias for selecting the larger of 2 quantities.

摘要

我们在反向奖励 contingency 任务中测试了6只黑猩猩(Pan troglodytes)、3只猩猩(Pongo pygmaeus)、4只倭黑猩猩(Pan paniscus)和2只大猩猩(Gorilla gorilla)。给个体呈现数量在0到6个食物项目之间的成对数量。在测试之前,一些有经验的猿类已经使用两种数量解决了这个任务,而其他的则完全没有经验。自最初测试以来,经过6到19个月后,有经验的猿类将它们的能力转移到了多个新的成对数量上。6只无经验的猿类中有2只(1只黑猩猩,1只倭黑猩猩)解决了这个任务——这一比例与之前使用两对数量的研究相当。它们的习得速度也与该研究中的成功受试者相当。数量之间的比例解释了很大一部分方差,但对无经验和有经验的个体影响不同。对于较小的比例,无经验的个体正确率远低于50%,有经验的个体则远高于50%,但对于较大的比例,两组都倾向于接近50%。因此,一些猿类不需要程序上的修改来克服它们在选择两个数量中较大者时的强烈偏好。

相似文献

1
How the great apes (Pan troglodytes, Pongo pygmaeus, Pan paniscus, Gorilla gorilla) perform on the reversed reward contingency task II: transfer to new quantities, long-term retention, and the impact of quantity ratios.大猩猩(黑猩猩、红毛猩猩、倭黑猩猩、大猩猩)在反向奖励 contingency 任务 II 中的表现:向新数量的转移、长期保持以及数量比率的影响。
J Comp Psychol. 2008 May;122(2):204-12. doi: 10.1037/0735-7036.122.2.204.
2
How the great apes (Pan troglodytes, Pongo pygmaeus, Pan paniscus, and Gorilla gorilla) perform on the reversed contingency task: the effects of food quantity and food visibility.大猩猩(黑猩猩、红毛猩猩、倭黑猩猩和大猩猩)在反向 contingency 任务中的表现:食物数量和食物可见性的影响。
J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 2006 Jan;32(1):60-70. doi: 10.1037/0097-7403.32.1.60.
3
Token transfers among great apes (Gorilla gorilla, Pongo pygmaeus, Pan paniscus, and Pan troglodytes): species differences, gestural requests, and reciprocal exchange.大猩猩(西部大猩猩、婆罗洲猩猩、倭黑猩猩和黑猩猩)之间的代币转移:物种差异、手势请求和互惠交换。
J Comp Psychol. 2009 Nov;123(4):375-84. doi: 10.1037/a0017253.
4
Great apes' (Pan troglodytes, Pan paniscus, Gorilla gorilla, Pongo pygmaeus) understanding of tool functional properties after limited experience.大猩猩(黑猩猩、倭黑猩猩、大猩猩、红毛猩猩)在有限经验后对工具功能特性的理解。
J Comp Psychol. 2008 May;122(2):220-30. doi: 10.1037/0735-7036.122.2.220.
5
The limits of endowment effects in great apes (Pan paniscus, Pan troglodytes, Gorilla gorilla, Pongo pygmaeus).大型猿类(矮黑猩猩、黑猩猩、大猩猩、红毛猩猩)禀赋效应的局限性
J Comp Psychol. 2011 Nov;125(4):436-45. doi: 10.1037/a0024516. Epub 2011 Jul 18.
6
Tubes, tables and traps: great apes solve two functionally equivalent trap tasks but show no evidence of transfer across tasks.管道、桌子与陷阱:大猩猩解决了两个功能等效的陷阱任务,但没有表现出任务间迁移的证据。
Anim Cogn. 2008 Jul;11(3):423-30. doi: 10.1007/s10071-007-0132-1. Epub 2008 Jan 9.
7
Discrete quantity judgments in the great apes (Pan paniscus, Pan troglodytes, Gorilla gorilla, Pongo pygmaeus): the effect of presenting whole sets versus item-by-item.大型猿类(倭黑猩猩、黑猩猩、大猩猩、红毛猩猩)的离散数量判断:呈现整组与逐项呈现的效果。
J Comp Psychol. 2007 Aug;121(3):241-9. doi: 10.1037/0735-7036.121.3.241.
8
The performance of bonobos (Pan paniscus), chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes), and orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus) in two versions of an object-choice task.倭黑猩猩(Pan paniscus)、黑猩猩(Pan troglodytes)和红毛猩猩(Pongo pygmaeus)在两种版本的物体选择任务中的表现。
J Comp Psychol. 2009 Aug;123(3):304-9. doi: 10.1037/a0016222.
9
Does early care affect joint attention in great apes (Pan troglodytes, Pan paniscus, Pongo abelii, Pongo pygmaeus, Gorilla gorilla)?早期照料会影响大猩猩(黑猩猩、倭黑猩猩、苏门答腊猩猩、婆罗洲猩猩、西部大猩猩)的共同注意吗?
J Comp Psychol. 2009 Aug;123(3):334-41. doi: 10.1037/a0015840.
10
Great apes use weight as a cue to find hidden food.大型猿类使用重量作为线索来寻找隐藏的食物。
Am J Primatol. 2011 Apr;73(4):323-34. doi: 10.1002/ajp.20899. Epub 2010 Nov 10.

引用本文的文献

1
Can chimpanzees conceive of mutually exclusive future possibilities? A Comment on: 'Chimpanzees prepare for alternative possible outcomes' (2023), by Engelmann .黑猩猩能设想相互排斥的未来可能性吗?对恩格尔曼《黑猩猩为其他可能的结果做准备》(2023年)的评论
Biol Lett. 2024 Jun;20(6):20230409. doi: 10.1098/rsbl.2023.0409. Epub 2024 Jun 26.
2
I'll (not) take that: The reverse-reward contingency task as a test of self-control and inhibition.我将(不会)接受那个:反向奖励应急任务作为自我控制和抑制的测试。
Learn Behav. 2023 Mar;51(1):9-14. doi: 10.3758/s13420-022-00538-0. Epub 2022 Jul 1.
3
Abstraction promotes creative problem-solving in rhesus monkeys.
抽象化促进恒河猴创造性问题解决能力。
Cognition. 2018 Jul;176:53-64. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2018.02.021. Epub 2018 Mar 20.
4
Chimpanzees can point to smaller amounts of food to accumulate larger amounts but they still fail the reverse-reward contingency task.黑猩猩能够指向较少数量的食物以积累更多食物,但它们在反向奖励应急任务中仍然失败。
J Exp Psychol Anim Learn Cogn. 2016 Oct;42(4):347-358. doi: 10.1037/xan0000115. Epub 2016 Sep 5.
5
Differing views: Can chimpanzees do Level 2 perspective-taking?不同观点:黑猩猩能进行二级视角采择吗?
Anim Cogn. 2016 May;19(3):555-64. doi: 10.1007/s10071-016-0956-7. Epub 2016 Feb 6.
6
Smoke and mirrors: Testing the scope of chimpanzees' appearance-reality understanding.烟雾与镜子:检验黑猩猩对表象与现实理解的范围。
Cognition. 2016 May;150:53-67. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2016.01.012. Epub 2016 Feb 2.
7
Social inhibitory control in five lemur species.五种狐猴的社会抑制控制
Primates. 2015 Jul;56(3):241-52. doi: 10.1007/s10329-015-0467-1. Epub 2015 Mar 31.
8
The evolutionary roots of human decision making.人类决策的进化根源。
Annu Rev Psychol. 2015 Jan 3;66:321-47. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-010814-015310.
9
Brown lemurs (Eulemur fulvus) can master the qualitative version of the reverse-reward contingency.褐美狐猴(Eulemur fulvus)能够掌握反向奖励关联的定性版本。
PLoS One. 2012;7(10):e48378. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0048378. Epub 2012 Oct 31.
10
Great apes' risk-taking strategies in a decision making task.巨猿在决策任务中的冒险策略。
PLoS One. 2011;6(12):e28801. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0028801. Epub 2011 Dec 21.