• 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

相似文献

1
Associative models fail to characterize transitive inference performance in rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta).联想模型无法描述恒河猴(猕猴)的传递性推理表现。
Learn Behav. 2020 Mar;48(1):135-148. doi: 10.3758/s13420-020-00417-6.
2
Cognitive mechanisms for transitive inference performance in rhesus monkeys: measuring the influence of associative strength and inferred order.恒河猴传递性推理表现的认知机制:测量联想强度和推理顺序的影响
J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 2012 Oct;38(4):331-45. doi: 10.1037/a0030306.
3
Positional inference in rhesus macaques.恒河猴中的位置推断。
Anim Cogn. 2022 Feb;25(1):73-93. doi: 10.1007/s10071-021-01536-x. Epub 2021 Jul 24.
4
Mechanisms of inferential order judgments in humans (Homo sapiens) and rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta).人类(智人)和恒河猴(猕猴)推理顺序判断的机制。
J Comp Psychol. 2011 May;125(2):227-38. doi: 10.1037/a0021572.
5
Concurrent conditional discrimination tests of transitive inference by macaque monkeys: list linking.猕猴传递性推理的并发条件辨别测试:列表链接
J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 1996 Jan;22(1):105-17.
6
Transitive inference in pigeons: measuring the associative values of Stimuli B and D.鸽子的传递性推理:测量刺激B和D的联想值。
Behav Processes. 2012 Mar;89(3):244-55. doi: 10.1016/j.beproc.2011.12.001. Epub 2011 Dec 15.
7
Co-operation of long-term and working memory representations in simultaneous chaining by rhesus monkeys ().恒河猴在同步连锁中长时记忆和工作记忆表征的协作()
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2019 Sep;72(9):2208-2224. doi: 10.1177/1747021819838432. Epub 2019 Apr 4.
8
Transitive inference after minimal training in rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta).恒河猴(Macaca mulatta)经过最少训练后的传递推理。
J Exp Psychol Anim Learn Cogn. 2021 Oct;47(4):464-475. doi: 10.1037/xan0000298.
9
Effect of stimulus orderability and reinforcement history on transitive responding in pigeons.刺激可排序性和强化历史对鸽子传递性反应的影响。
Behav Processes. 2006 May 1;72(2):161-72. doi: 10.1016/j.beproc.2006.01.008. Epub 2006 Feb 7.
10
Transitive responding in animals and humans: Exaptation rather than adaptation?动物和人类的传递性反应:是扩展适应而非适应性?
Behav Processes. 1998 Feb;42(2-3):107-37. doi: 10.1016/s0376-6357(97)00072-7.

引用本文的文献

1
Memory reactivation in slow wave sleep enhances relational learning in humans.慢波睡眠中的记忆再激活增强了人类的关系学习。
Commun Biol. 2024 Mar 8;7(1):288. doi: 10.1038/s42003-024-05947-7.
2
In the absence of extensive initial training, cleaner wrasse Labroides dimidiatus fail a transitive inference task.在缺乏广泛的初始训练的情况下,清洁濑鱼(Labroides dimidiatus)无法完成传递性推理任务。
PLoS One. 2023 Jun 23;18(6):e0287402. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0287402. eCollection 2023.
3
Individual differences could explain the failure in transitive inference formation in pigeons using probabilistic reinforcement.个体差异可以解释鸽子在使用概率强化进行传递性推理形成过程中的失败。
Front Psychol. 2023 Jan 17;13:1033583. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1033583. eCollection 2022.
4
Hippocampal and medial prefrontal cortices encode structural task representations following progressive and interleaved training schedules.海马体和内侧前额叶皮质在渐进式和交错式训练计划后,对结构任务的表现进行编码。
PLoS Comput Biol. 2022 Oct 17;18(10):e1010566. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1010566. eCollection 2022 Oct.
5
Positional inference in rhesus macaques.恒河猴中的位置推断。
Anim Cogn. 2022 Feb;25(1):73-93. doi: 10.1007/s10071-021-01536-x. Epub 2021 Jul 24.
6
Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) show subtle signs of uncertainty when choices are more difficult.黑猩猩(Pan troglodytes)在选择更加困难时会表现出细微的不确定迹象。
Cognition. 2021 Sep;214:104766. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104766. Epub 2021 May 26.
7
Category learning in a transitive inference paradigm.在传递推理范式中的类别学习。
Mem Cognit. 2021 Jul;49(5):1020-1035. doi: 10.3758/s13421-020-01136-z. Epub 2021 Feb 9.

本文引用的文献

1
Reward associations do not explain transitive inference performance in monkeys.奖励关联不能解释猴子的传递性推理表现。
Sci Adv. 2019 Jul 31;5(7):eaaw2089. doi: 10.1126/sciadv.aaw2089. eCollection 2019 Jul.
2
Transitive inference in pigeons may result from differential tendencies to reject the test stimuli acquired during training.鸽子的传递性推理可能源于在训练过程中对测试刺激产生的不同拒绝倾向。
Anim Cogn. 2019 Sep;22(5):619-624. doi: 10.1007/s10071-019-01257-2. Epub 2019 Mar 29.
3
Understanding behavior under nonverbal transitive-inference procedures: Stimulus-control-topography analyses.理解非言语传递性推理程序下的行为:刺激控制-地形分析。
Behav Processes. 2017 Jul;140:202-215. doi: 10.1016/j.beproc.2017.05.010. Epub 2017 May 13.
4
Transitive inference in humans (Homo sapiens) and rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta) after massed training of the last two list items.在对最后两个列表项进行集中训练后,人类(智人)和恒河猴(猕猴)的传递性推理。
J Comp Psychol. 2017 Aug;131(3):231-245. doi: 10.1037/com0000065. Epub 2017 Mar 23.
5
Effects of spatial training on transitive inference performance in humans and rhesus monkeys.空间训练对人类和恒河猴传递性推理表现的影响。
J Exp Psychol Anim Learn Cogn. 2014 Oct;40(4):477-89. doi: 10.1037/xan0000038. Epub 2014 Jul 28.
6
Transitive inference in two lemur species (Eulemur macaco and Eulemur fulvus).两种狐猴(黑美狐猴和褐美狐猴)的传递性推理
Am J Primatol. 2015 Mar;77(3):338-45. doi: 10.1002/ajp.22349. Epub 2014 Oct 18.
7
Hippocampal lesion and transitive inference: dissociation of inference-based and reinforcement-based strategies in pigeons.海马体损伤与传递性推理:鸽子中基于推理和基于强化策略的分离
Hippocampus. 2015 Feb;25(2):219-26. doi: 10.1002/hipo.22366. Epub 2014 Sep 25.
8
Transitive responding in animals and humans: Exaptation rather than adaptation?动物和人类的传递性反应:是扩展适应而非适应性?
Behav Processes. 1998 Feb;42(2-3):107-37. doi: 10.1016/s0376-6357(97)00072-7.
9
Pigeon transitive inference: Tests of simple accounts of a complex performance.鸽子传递性推理:对复杂行为简单解释的测试。
Behav Processes. 1997 Jan;39(1):95-112. doi: 10.1016/s0376-6357(96)00048-4.
10
Direct and relational representation during transitive list linking in pinyon jays (Gymnorhinus cyanocephalus).蓝头松鸦(Gymnorhinus cyanocephalus)传递性列表链接过程中的直接和关系表征。
J Comp Psychol. 2014 Feb;128(1):1-10. doi: 10.1037/a0034627. Epub 2013 Nov 4.

联想模型无法描述恒河猴(猕猴)的传递性推理表现。

Associative models fail to characterize transitive inference performance in rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta).

作者信息

Lazareva Olga F, Paxton Gazes Regina, Elkins Zachary, Hampton Robert

机构信息

324 Olin Hall, Department of Psychology, Drake University, Des Moines, IA, 50311-4505, USA.

Department of Psychology and Animal Behavior, Bucknell University, Lewisburg, PA, USA.

出版信息

Learn Behav. 2020 Mar;48(1):135-148. doi: 10.3758/s13420-020-00417-6.

DOI:10.3758/s13420-020-00417-6
PMID:32040696
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7853493/
Abstract

It has been suggested that non-verbal transitive inference (if A > B and B > C, then A > C) can be accounted for by associative models. However, little is known about the applicability of such models to primate data. In Experiment 1, we tested the fit of two associative models to primate data from both sequential training, in which the training pairs were presented in a backward order, and simultaneous training, in which all training pairs are presented intermixed from the beginning. We found that the models provided an equally poor fit for both sequential and simultaneous training presentations, contrary to the case with data from pigeons. The models were also unable to predict the robust symbolic distance effects characteristic of primate transitive choices. In Experiment 2, we used the models to fit a list-linking design in which two seven-item transitive lists were first trained independently (A > B…. > F > G and H > I …. > M > N) then combined via a linking pair (G+ H-) into a single, 14-item list. The model produced accurate predictions for between-list pairs, but did not predict transitive responses for within-list pairs from list 2. Overall, our results support research indicating that associative strength does not adequately account for the behavior of primates in transitive inference tasks. The results also suggest that transitive choices may result from different processes, or different weighting of multiple processes, across species.

摘要

有人认为,非语言传递性推理(如果A > B且B > C,那么A > C)可以用联想模型来解释。然而,对于此类模型在灵长类动物数据中的适用性却知之甚少。在实验1中,我们测试了两种联想模型对灵长类动物数据的拟合度,这些数据来自顺序训练(训练对以倒序呈现)和同时训练(所有训练对从一开始就混合呈现)。我们发现,与鸽子的数据情况相反,这些模型对顺序训练和同时训练呈现的拟合度都同样很差。这些模型也无法预测灵长类动物传递性选择所特有的强大的符号距离效应。在实验2中,我们使用这些模型来拟合一种列表链接设计,其中两个包含七个项目的传递性列表首先被独立训练(A > B… > F > G和H > I… > M > N),然后通过一个链接对(G + H -)组合成一个单一的、包含14个项目的列表。该模型对列表间的配对产生了准确的预测,但没有预测列表2中列表内配对的传递性反应。总体而言,我们的结果支持了相关研究,即联想强度不能充分解释灵长类动物在传递性推理任务中的行为。结果还表明,跨物种的传递性选择可能源于不同的过程,或者不同过程的不同权重。