Suppr超能文献

家犬(Canis lupus familiaris)在两种物体选择任务中的表现。

The performance of domestic dogs (Canis lupus familiaris) on two versions of the object choice task.

机构信息

School of Psychology, University of Sussex, Falmer, BN1 9QH, East Sussex, UK.

出版信息

Anim Cogn. 2021 Sep;24(5):1087-1098. doi: 10.1007/s10071-021-01500-9. Epub 2021 Mar 9.

Abstract

Object choice task (OCT) studies are widely used to assess the phylogenetic and ontogenetic distribution of the understanding of communicative cues, with this understanding serving as a proxy for the discernment of communicative intentions. Recent reviews have found systematic procedural and methodological differences in studies which compare performances across species on the OCT. One such difference concerns the spatial configuration of the test set-up, specifically the distances between the two containers (inter-object distance) and the subject-experimenter distance. Here, we tested dogs on two versions of the task: a central version in which the containers were in the subjects' direct line of vision, and a peripheral version in which the position of the containers was distal to the subject. Half of the subjects were tested with a barrier in the testing environment (as nonhuman primates are tested) and the other half without. We found that dogs tested with a barrier performed significantly better in the central version and were more likely to fail to make a choice in the peripheral version. Dogs tested without a barrier showed comparable performance on the two versions. We thus failed to find support for the distraction hypothesis in dogs. We discuss potential explanations for this, highlighting how methodological differences in the presentation of the OCT can influence outcomes in studies using this paradigm.

摘要

物体选择任务(OCT)研究被广泛用于评估对交际线索理解的系统发生和个体发生分布,这种理解是识别交际意图的代表。最近的综述发现,在比较不同物种在 OCT 上表现的研究中,存在系统的程序和方法学差异。其中一个差异涉及测试设置的空间配置,特别是两个容器之间的距离(物体间距离)和主体-实验者之间的距离。在这里,我们在两个版本的任务中对狗进行了测试:一个是中央版本,容器在受试犬的直接视野范围内;另一个是外围版本,容器的位置距离受试犬较远。一半的受试犬在测试环境中使用了障碍物(就像对非人类灵长类动物进行测试一样),另一半没有使用。我们发现,使用障碍物的狗在中央版本中表现明显更好,在周边版本中更有可能无法做出选择。没有使用障碍物的狗在两个版本上表现相当。因此,我们未能在狗身上找到分心假说的支持。我们讨论了对此的潜在解释,强调了在使用这种范式的研究中,OCT 呈现方式的方法学差异如何影响结果。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9539/8360901/d69633c4e150/10071_2021_1500_Fig1_HTML.jpg

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