Suppr超能文献

鸽子类别学习:重新审视谢泼德、霍夫兰德和詹金斯(1961年)的任务。

Pigeon category learning: Revisiting the Shepard, Hovland, and Jenkins (1961) tasks.

作者信息

Navarro Victor M, Jani Ridhi, Wasserman Edward A

机构信息

Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences.

出版信息

J Exp Psychol Anim Learn Cogn. 2019 Apr;45(2):174-184. doi: 10.1037/xan0000198. Epub 2019 Mar 14.

Abstract

In a seminal study, Shepard, Hovland, and Jenkins (1961; henceforth SHJ) assessed potential mechanisms involved in categorization learning. To do so, they sequentially trained human participants with 6 different visual categorization tasks that varied in structural complexity. Humans' exceptionally strong performance on 1 of these tasks (Type 2, organized around exclusive-or relations) could not be solely explained by structural complexity, and has since been considered the hallmark of rule-use in these tasks. In the present project, we concurrently trained pigeons on all 6 SHJ tasks. Our results revealed that the structural complexity of the tasks was highly correlated with group-level performance. Nevertheless, we observed notable individual differences in performance. Two extensions of a prominent categorization model, ALCOVE (Kruschke, 1992), suggested that disparities in the discriminability of the dimensions used to construct the experimental stimuli could account for these differences. Overall, our pigeons' generally weak performance on the Type 2 task provides no evidence of rule-use on the SHJ tasks. Pigeons thus join monkeys in the contingent of species that solve these categorization tasks solely on the basis of the physical properties of the training stimuli. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

摘要

在一项具有开创性的研究中,谢泼德、霍夫兰和詹金斯(1961年;以下简称SHJ)评估了分类学习中涉及的潜在机制。为此,他们依次对人类参与者进行了6种不同视觉分类任务的训练,这些任务在结构复杂性上有所不同。人类在其中一项任务(类型2,围绕异或关系组织)上表现出的异常出色的表现,不能仅仅用结构复杂性来解释,从那以后,这一表现就被视为这些任务中规则使用的标志。在本项目中,我们同时对鸽子进行了所有6种SHJ任务的训练。我们的结果表明,任务的结构复杂性与组水平的表现高度相关。然而,我们观察到了表现上显著的个体差异。一个著名分类模型ALCOVE(克鲁施克,1992年)的两个扩展表明,用于构建实验刺激的维度的可辨别性差异可以解释这些差异。总体而言,我们的鸽子在类型2任务上普遍较弱的表现,没有提供在SHJ任务中使用规则的证据。因此,鸽子与猴子一样,都是仅根据训练刺激的物理属性来解决这些分类任务的物种。(《心理学文摘数据库记录》(c)2019美国心理学会,保留所有权利)

相似文献

2
Scene gist categorization by pigeons.鸽子对场景要点的分类。
J Exp Psychol Anim Learn Cogn. 2014 Apr;40(2):162-77. doi: 10.1037/xan0000014.
3
Testing analogical rule transfer in pigeons (Columba livia).测试鸽子(Columba livia)类比规则迁移。
Cognition. 2019 Feb;183:256-268. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2018.11.011. Epub 2018 Nov 30.
9
Pigeons' categorization may be exclusively nonanalytic.鸽子的分类可能完全是非分析的。
Psychon Bull Rev. 2011 Apr;18(2):414-21. doi: 10.3758/s13423-010-0047-8.

本文引用的文献

3
Brain Evolution: Intelligence without a Cortex.大脑进化:无皮质的智力。
Curr Biol. 2018 Mar 5;28(5):R213-R215. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2018.01.065.
6
8
Stepwise conceptualization in pigeons.鸽子的逐步概念化
J Exp Psychol Anim Learn Cogn. 2016 Jan;42(1):44-50. doi: 10.1037/xan0000083. Epub 2015 Oct 12.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验