Renner Elizabeth, Atkinson Mark, Caldwell Christine A
Psychology, Faculty of Natural Sciences, University of Stirling, Stirling, UK.
PeerJ. 2019 Nov 4;7:e7960. doi: 10.7717/peerj.7960. eCollection 2019.
We aimed to study whether a non-human primate species responded differently to information acquired socially compared with that acquired individually. To do so, we attempted to train squirrel monkeys to perform binary discriminations. These involved exposure to either social information (human or puppet demonstrator performs an initial 'information trial') or individual exploration (monkey performs information trial as well as subsequent test trials). In Experiment 1, we presented the task on a touchscreen tablet. Only one monkey appeared to learn the significance of the information trial, and across the group there was no improvement in performance over sessions. The proficient individual showed little evidence of successful transfer to three-way discrimination problems, suggesting limited representation of the task structure. In Experiment 2, we used a logically identical task, presented as a physical object choice (inverted cups concealing a food reward). No monkeys learned to use the information trial cues, and success again did not increase over sessions. We concluded that the monkeys' poor performance in Experiment 1 was not attributable to the mode of presentation (touchscreen), but reflected real difficulties with mastering the task structure. For both experiments, we analysed the monkeys' spontaneous responses to the different trial types (social-win, social-lose, individual-win, and individual-lose). We found that monkeys had a tendency to repeat selections made during the information trial, whether these were made by themselves or by a demonstrator. This tendency to repeat was observed even following lose trials (i.e. when incorrect). Apparent 'success' following win trials was probably largely an artefact of behavioural inertia (individual learning conditions) and stimulus enhancement (social learning conditions), rather than sensitivity to the reward cues associated with that stimulus. Although monkeys did respond somewhat differently (more repeats) following win trials, compared with lose trials, this was no more apparent in the object choice task than the touchscreen task, again suggesting that the less ecologically valid presentation medium did not actively disrupt potential for learning the discrimination rule. Both touchscreen and physical object choice tasks appear to be valid methods to study learning in squirrel monkeys, with neither method giving a clear performance advantage over the other. However, this population did not master the contingencies in these tasks.
我们旨在研究一种非人类灵长类动物对通过社交方式获取的信息与通过个体方式获取的信息的反应是否不同。为此,我们试图训练松鼠猴进行二元辨别。这包括让它们接触社交信息(人类或木偶示范者进行初始的“信息试验”)或个体探索(猴子进行信息试验以及随后的测试试验)。在实验1中,我们在触摸屏平板电脑上呈现任务。只有一只猴子似乎学会了信息试验的重要性,而且在整个实验组中,随着实验次数的增加,表现并没有改善。这只熟练的个体几乎没有证据表明能够成功转移到三元辨别问题上,这表明对任务结构的表征有限。在实验2中,我们使用了一个逻辑上相同的任务,以实物选择的形式呈现(倒扣的杯子隐藏着食物奖励)。没有猴子学会使用信息试验线索,而且随着实验次数的增加,成功次数也没有增加。我们得出结论,猴子在实验1中的糟糕表现并非归因于呈现方式(触摸屏),而是反映了在掌握任务结构方面存在实际困难。对于这两个实验,我们分析了猴子对不同试验类型(社交成功、社交失败、个体成功和个体失败)的自发反应。我们发现,猴子倾向于重复在信息试验中做出的选择,无论这些选择是由它们自己还是由示范者做出的。即使在失败试验之后(即当选择错误时),这种重复的倾向也会被观察到。成功试验后的明显“成功”可能很大程度上是行为惯性(个体学习条件)和刺激增强(社会学习条件)的假象,而不是对与该刺激相关的奖励线索的敏感。尽管与失败试验相比,猴子在成功试验后确实表现出有些不同的反应(更多的重复),但在实物选择任务中并不比在触摸屏任务中更明显,这再次表明生态效度较低的呈现媒介并没有积极干扰学习辨别规则的潜力。触摸屏和实物选择任务似乎都是研究松鼠猴学习的有效方法,两种方法都没有明显的性能优势。然而,这群猴子并没有掌握这些任务中的意外情况。