Children's Performance on “Animal Tests” of Oddity: Implications for Cognitive Processes Required for Tests of Oddity and Delayed Nonmatch to Sample

Overman, William H.; Bachevalier, Jocelyne; Moore, Kim

doi:10.1006/jecp.1996.0029

Cited by 17 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, one might predict that young male children would outperform young female children on the object reversal task. This is exactly the finding from studies in our laboratory (Overman et al, 1996a,b). Here, children were tested with non-verbal procedures exactly as in previous studies with monkeys.…”

Section: Gender Differences On Igt Performance: Deck-by-deck Analysissupporting

confidence: 90%

Iowa Gambling Task with non-clinical participants: effects of using real + virtual cards and additional trials

Overman

Pierce

2013

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Performance on the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT) in clinical populations can be interpreted only in relation to established baseline performance in normal populations. As in all comparisons of assessment tools, the normal baseline must reflect performance under conditions in which subjects can function at their best levels. In this review, we show that a number of variables enhance IGT performance in non-clinical participants. First, optimal performance is produced by having participants turn over real cards while viewing virtual cards on a computer screen. The use of only virtual cards results in significantly lower performance than the combination of real + virtual cards. Secondly, administration of more than 100 trials also enhances performance. When using the real/virtual card procedure, performance is shown to significantly increase from early adolescence through young adulthood. Under these conditions young (mean age 19 years) and older (mean age 59 years) adults perform equally. Females, as a group, score lower than males because females tend to choose cards from high-frequency-of-gain Deck B. Groups of females with high or low gonadal hormones perform equally. Concurrent tasks, e.g., presentation of aromas, decrease performance in males. Age and gender effects are discussed in terms of a dynamic between testosterone and orbital prefrontal cortex.

show abstract

Section: Gender Differences On Igt Performance: Deck-by-deck Analysissupporting

confidence: 90%

Iowa Gambling Task with non-clinical participants: effects of using real + virtual cards and additional trials

Overman

Pierce

2013

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is known that children's relational learning can be enhanced when language is intentionally manipulated, e.g., when they are provided with descriptions such as ''top,'' ''middle,'' ''bottom,'' ''next to this one,'' ''here,'' etc., (Ankowski, Thom, Sandhofer, & Blaisdel, 2012;Gentner, Angorro, & Klibanoff, 2011) or when they are provided with instructions to choose ''the one that does not belong'' in the case of oddity (Overman, Bachevalier et al, 1996). In the present study, perhaps older children were more likely to intentionally or covertly label the relational stimuli, e.g., ''close'' or ''far.''…”

Section: Language Developmentmentioning

confidence: 85%

Use of a non-navigational, non-verbal landmark task in children

Overman

Pierce

Watterson

et al. 2013

International Journal of Behavioral Development

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two hundred and twenty two children (104 females), 1-8 years of age and young adults, were tested for up to 25 days on five versions of a non-verbal, non-navigational landmark task that had previously been used for monkeys. In monkeys, performance on this task is severely impaired following damage to the parietal cortex. For the basic task, the positive of two identical stimuli concealed a food reward and was designated by spatial proximity of a salient landmark. None of the 1-and 2-year-old children learned the task, i.e., they failed to consistently reach for and displace the positive stimulus in 25 test days. Of the 3-, 4-, and 5-year-old groups, 56%, 70%, and 77% of the children, respectively, mastered the task within 25 days. Children older than 5 and adults rapidly mastered the task. In Experiment #2, all subjects, 1-6 years of age, rapidly mastered a non-relational task when the choice stimulus was attached to the landmark, but the youngest children failed to transfer performance when the landmark was subsequently detached. Children under the age of 5 did not tolerate relational ambiguity as well as adults did. Replications of the first two experiments produced virtually identical results and indicated that the tests have a high degree of reliability. In Experiment #5, there were two distinct proximal landmarks, one of which always designated the positive stimulus. This manipulation did not improve performance of younger children. As compared to results from navigational landmark tasks, results obtained in the Wisconsin General Testing Apparatus (WGTA) indicate a very narrow focus of attention on the response site. Thus, small separations between discriminative cue and response site significantly affect performance, especially in younger children. By comparing the present results with those from monkeys, we speculate that components of the parietal pathways involved with attention and reaching mature between 1 and 5 years of age in children.

show abstract

“…We avoided the use of instructions to determine if children, like chimpanzees, would choose the larger of two sets spontaneously, without verbal instructions from the experimenter. This methodological detail, of withholding instruction, sometimes leads to poorer performance in children compared to either nonhuman animals (Tomasello et al, 1993) or younger counterparts (Overman et al, 1996), but we expected that for a quantity judgment task, children might show a natural bias to "go for more" (Estes, 1976) in much the same way as has been demonstrated with nonhuman animals (Rumbaugh et al, 1987;Boysen and Berntson, 1995).…”

Section: Experimental Designmentioning

confidence: 98%

Comparing children’s Homo sapiens and chimpanzees’ Pan troglodytes quantity judgments of sequentially presented sets of items

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We presented a quantity judgment task that involved comparing two sequentially presented sets of items to preschoolers and chimpanzees using nearly identical procedures that excluded verbal instructions to children. Trial difficulty in this task reflected the ratio difference between sets of discrete items where larger ratios (e.g., 0.80 as from comparing 4 to 5) were more difficult than smaller ones (e.g., 0.50 as from comparing 4 to 8). Children also completed verbal-based tasks probing the relationship between counting proficiency and performance on the quantity judgment task of sequentially presented identical sized items. Both species' performance was best when ratios between comparison sets were small regardless of set size in all types of tasks. Generally, chimpanzees and older children performed better than younger children except at larger ratios. Children's counting proficiency was not related to success in choosing the larger of two quantities of identical-sized items. These results indicate that chimpanzees and children share an approximate number sense that is reflected through analog magnitude estimation when comparing quantities [Current Zoology 57 (4): [419][420][421][422][423][424][425][426][427][428] 2011].

show abstract

Children's Performance on “Animal Tests” of Oddity: Implications for Cognitive Processes Required for Tests of Oddity and Delayed Nonmatch to Sample

Cited by 17 publications

References 0 publications

Iowa Gambling Task with non-clinical participants: effects of using real + virtual cards and additional trials

Iowa Gambling Task with non-clinical participants: effects of using real + virtual cards and additional trials

Use of a non-navigational, non-verbal landmark task in children

Comparing children’s Homo sapiens and chimpanzees’ Pan troglodytes quantity judgments of sequentially presented sets of items

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About