Episodic-like memory: Pigeons can report location pecked when unexpectedly asked

Zentall, Thomas R.; Singer, Rebecca A.; Stagner, Jessica P.

doi:10.1016/j.beproc.2008.05.003

Cited by 73 publications

(101 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, as memory weakened with longer retention intervals, a greater proportion of forced tests, but not chosen tests, would be based on poor memory. The findings were clearly in line with the theoretical idea that monkeys chose to take the memory test when they felt certain of the awareness (Heyes, 1994(Heyes, , 1995, theory of mind (Povinelli, 2000), mental time travel (Suddendorf & Corballis, 2007;Zentall, Singer, & Stagner, 2008) and metacognition (Crystal & Foote, 2009, 2011Jozefowiez, Staddon, & Cerutti, 2009). …”

Section: Judging the Adequacy Of Current Knowledgesupporting

confidence: 83%

Information Seeking in Animals: Metacognition?

Roberts¹,

McMillan²,

Musolino³

et al. 2012

CCBR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Metacognition refers to humans' ability to monitor the state of their own learning and to judge the correctness of information retrieved from memory. Inferences about metacognition-like processes in non-human animals have been made from studies in which subjects judge the adequacy of previously presented information and from information seeking studies in which no prior knowledge exists. This article briefly reviews the former type of experiments but focuses on studies of information seeking. A number of studies now indicate that apes and monkeys will look down opaque tubes or under opaque containers to see the location of a hidden reward. They less often make looking responses when other information indicates the location of reward, such as visible baiting, transparent tubes or containers, or logical inference. Studies of information seeking in pigeons, rats, and dogs are reported that indicate they do not readily show the types of looking responses seen in primates. If given a forced choice between stimuli that do and do not yield information about the location of reward, however, these non-primates make the informative choice. It is suggested that the choice of information in these pigeon, rat, and dog experiments may be a form of secondary sign-tracking and thus different from the metacognition-like processes used by primates.

show abstract

Section: Judging the Adequacy Of Current Knowledgesupporting

confidence: 83%

Information Seeking in Animals: Metacognition?

Roberts¹,

McMillan²,

Musolino³

et al. 2012

CCBR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One problem with many animal approaches to episodic memory is that training generates expectations, which may lead to memories of planned actions (Singer & Zentall, 2007;Zentall, 2005Zentall, , 2006Zentall, Clement, Bhatt, & Allen, 2001;Zentall, Singer, & Stagner, 2008). Zentall and colleagues have argued that when information is encoded for use in an expected memory test, explicitly encoded information may generate a planned action; thus, at the time of the test, the remembered action can occur successfully without remembering any earlier episodes.…”

Section: Incidental Encoding and Unexpected Questionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, carrying forward information that is needed at a future test while not specifically retrieving a memory of the earlier episode represents a serious threat to the episodicmemory hypothesis. Thus, it is necessary to rule out the hypothesis that accurate performance in the test is based on a planned action generated when information was explicitly encoded rather than a memory of the episode (Crystal, 2013b;Singer & Zentall, 2007;Zentall et al, 2001;Zentall et al, 2008;Zhou & Crystal, 2011). Notably, it is possible that animals may have solved previous tests of episodic memory by using learned semantic rules without remembering the episode.…”

Section: Incidental Encoding and Unexpected Questionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…By contrast, when information is encoded incidentally, it is not possible to transform information into an action plan because the nature of the subsequent memory test is not yet known. Thus, accurate performance observed in an unexpected test after incidental encoding would suggest that this performance is based on memory of the earlier episode (i.e., retrieval of an episodic memory; Singer & Zentall, 2007;Zentall et al, 2001;Zentall et al, 2008;Zhou & Crystal, 2011). Zentall and colleagues (Singer & Zentall, 2007;Zentall et al, 2001;Zentall et al, 2008) have demonstrated that pigeons pass this episodic-memory test.…”

Section: Incidental Encoding and Unexpected Questionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Animal models of episodic memory

Crystal¹

2018

CCBR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

People retrieve episodic memories about specific earlier events that happened to them. Accordingly, researchers have sought to evaluate the hypothesis that nonhumans retrieve episodic memories. The central hypothesis of an animal model of episodic memory is that, at the moment of a memory assessment, the animal retrieves a memory of the specific earlier event. Testing this hypothesis requires the elimination of nonepisodic memory hypotheses. A number of case studies focus on the development of animal models of episodic memory, including what-where-when memory, source memory, item-in-context memory, and unexpected questions. Compelling evidence for episodic memory comes from studies in which judgments of familiarity cannot produce accurate choices in memory assessments. These approaches may be used to explore the evolution of cognition. Keywords: episodic memory, what-where-when memory, source memory, binding, item-in-context memory IntroductionFundamental aspects of human cognition raise a natural question, namely, How widely distributed are elements of cognition among nonhuman animals? Exploring the distribution of cognitive processes in animals may provide insight into the evolution of cognition (Emery & Clayton, 2004;Gallistel, 1990). This review focuses on episodic memory (see Table 1). Students of human memory focus on episodic memory because it stores personal past experiences of an individual. In this respect, episodic memory is self-referencing. By contrast, other memory systems store facts without retaining other features that accompany memory storage. Moreover, students of human memory have been concerned with subjective experiences that are thought to accompany episodic memory retrieval in people (Tulving, 1985(Tulving, , 1987. However, documenting behavioral expression of a putative subjective experience is problematic in animals. This review advocates that it is profitable to focus on the content of episodic memories, rather than the subjective experiences that may accompany episodic memory. The central hypothesis of an animal model of episodic memory is that, at the moment of a memory assessment, the animal remembers back in time and retrieves a memory of the earlier event or episode (Crystal, 2013b(Crystal, , 2016a(Crystal, , 2016b). An important alternative explanation exists whenever the animal can solve the memory test without remembering back to the specific earlier event. In this review, I focus on judgments of familiarity as a primary nonepisodic memory alternative. According to this view, the presentation of a stimulus gives rise to a memory trace that passively decays as a function of time. Because the age of memories can be detected from a comparison of memory trace strengths, an animal may solve a new-old memory test by following a relatively simple rule such as, Choose the item that currently generates the lowest level of familiarity. Critically, an animal that uses judgments of relative familiarity need not retrieve an episodic memory of the earlier event (see details that follow). Oth...

show abstract

“…

…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Rats answer an unexpected question after incidental encoding

Zhou¹,

Crystal²

2011

PsycEXTRA Dataset

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryA fundamental aspect of episodic memory is that retrieval of information can occur when encoding is incidental and memory assessment is unexpected [1][2][3][4]. These features are difficult to model in animals because behavioral training likely gives rise to well-learned expectations about the sequence of events. Thus, the possibility remains that animals may solve an episodic-memory test by using well-learned semantic rules without remembering the episode at memory assessment. Here we show that rats can answer an unexpected question after incidental encoding in a hippocampal-dependent manner, consistent with the use of episodic memory. Rats were initially trained to report about a recent event (food vs. no-food) and separately searched for food where there was no expectation of being asked about the presence of food. To test episodic memory, rats were given the opportunity to incidentally encode the presence or absence of food and were unexpectedly asked to report about the recent event. Temporary inactivation of the CA3 region of the hippocampus with bilateral infusions of lidocaine selectively eliminated the ability of rats to answer the unexpected, but not the expected, question. Our studies suggest that rats remember an earlier episode after incidental encoding based upon hippocampal-dependent episodic memory. Results and DiscussionAlthough events are not always known to be important when they occur, people can nonetheless remember details about such events. For example, eyewitness accounts rely on memories for incidental aspects of an earlier episode not known to be important when the episode occurred. Encoding occurs incidentally when apparently unimportant information is stored, but it is not known at the time of encoding that the information may subsequently be useful. By contrast, information is explicitly encoded when it is known that the information is needed later. When information is encoded for use in an upcoming, expected test of retention, it is possible that the explicitly encoded information is used to generate a planned action; according to this view, at the time of the test, the remembered action can occur successfully without remembering the earlier episode. Thus, it is difficult to determine if successful performance is based on a memory of the earlier episode or a planned action generated when information was explicitly encoded [1][2][3][4]. Indeed, it is possible that animals may have solved previous tests of episodic memory (e.g., [4][5][6][7]) by using well-learned semantic rules without remembering the episode. Formally, learned rules stored in semantic Publisher's Disclaimer: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final citable form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the conte...

show abstract

Episodic-like memory: Pigeons can report location pecked when unexpectedly asked

Cited by 73 publications

References 19 publications

Information Seeking in Animals: Metacognition?

Information Seeking in Animals: Metacognition?

Animal models of episodic memory

Rats answer an unexpected question after incidental encoding

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About