Learning of the insoluble conditional reaction problem by rhesus monkeys

Flagg, Steven F.

doi:10.3758/bf03199172

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Fourth, researchers have asked whether animals can solve discrimination problems that embody the exclusive-or (XOR) problem (Flagg, 1974; Medin, 1975). For example, suppose that stimuli can be small or large and black or white, and that small white and large black stimuli belong to Category A, whereas large white and small black stimuli belong to Category B.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Category Learning in Rhesus Monkeys: A Study of the Shepard, Hovland, and Jenkins (1961) Tasks.

Smith

Minda

Washburn

2004

Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

126

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In influential research, R. N. Shepard, C. I. Hovland, and H. M. Jenkins (1961) surveyed humans' categorization abilities using tasks based in rules, exclusive-or (XOR) relations, and exemplar memorization. Humans' performance was poorly predicted by cue-conditioning or stimulus-generalization theories, causing Shepard et al. to describe it in terms of hypothesis selection and rule application that were possibly supported by verbal mediation. The authors of the current article surveyed monkeys' categorization abilities similarly. Monkeys, like humans, found category tasks with a single relevant dimension the easiest and perceptually chaotic tasks requiring exemplar memorization the most difficult. Monkeys, unlike humans, found tasks based in XOR relations very difficult. The authors discuss the character and basis of the species difference in categorization and consider whether monkeys are the generalization-based cognitive system that humans are not.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Category Learning in Rhesus Monkeys: A Study of the Shepard, Hovland, and Jenkins (1961) Tasks.

Smith

Minda

Washburn

2004

Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

126

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Differences between Spiker's theory and Medin's theory are considered elsewhere (Medin, 1973 ;Flagg, 1974). The main assumption the theories have in common is that the features comprising a stimulus compound or complex are not assumed to be handled independently.…”

Section: Medinmentioning

confidence: 99%