Watanabe S, Hodos W, Bessette B B
Physiol Behav. 1984 May;32(5):847-50. doi: 10.1016/0031-9384(84)90204-x.
Four groups of pigeons each were trained to perform four visual-discrimination tasks of varying difficulty. Two groups received the training binocularly and the other two monocularly. Two types of stimulus displays were used. In one display the two pecking keys were mounted in a horizontal arrangement, whereas, in the other display, the two keys were mounted in a vertical arrangement. In both displays binocular learning was more rapid than monocular learning. This difference increased with problem difficulty. Moreover, training with the horizontal key arrangement resulted in more rapid learning with either viewing condition. These results suggest that the inferiority of monocular learning was not caused by restriction of the visual field along the horizontal plane, and the failure to detect monocular-binocular differences in learning in previous reports may have resulted from inadequate task difficulty. Finally, the results suggest that monocularly-viewing birds should not be regarded as "natural split-brain" preparations.
四组鸽子分别接受训练,以执行四种难度各异的视觉辨别任务。其中两组鸽子通过双眼接受训练,另外两组则通过单眼接受训练。使用了两种类型的刺激展示。在一种展示中,两个啄键呈水平排列,而在另一种展示中,两个键呈垂直排列。在两种展示中,双眼学习都比单眼学习更快。这种差异随着问题难度的增加而增大。此外,无论在哪种观察条件下,使用水平键排列进行训练都能带来更快的学习效果。这些结果表明,单眼学习的劣势并非由沿水平面的视野受限所致,先前报告中未能检测到学习中的单眼 - 双眼差异可能是由于任务难度不足。最后,结果表明,单眼观察的鸟类不应被视为“天然裂脑”标本。