Memory in Monkeys for Compound Stimuli

Stepień, L; Cordeau, J. Pierre

doi:10.2307/1420176

Cited by 37 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Pilot data had raised the concern that, when begun with all four trial types, the matching task might prove to be difficult enough to result in serious loss of attention to the auditory stimuli. It should be noted that Stepien and Cordeau (1960) also used only three trial types in the early stages of their study.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It may not be an accident that Stepien and Cordeau's (1960) monkeys were experimentally naive. However, Thompson's (1980) monkeys were also experimentally naive, but it is possible that his training procedures were not as favorable for establishing auditory matching in monkeys as Stepien and Cordeau's, which were not radically different from our own.…”

Section: Acqmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Another relevant fact is that Stepien and Cordeau (1960) successfully trained African green monkeys to match click rates varying in frequency between 5 and 20 Hz. We have suggested that there may be a general coding process for simple repetition rate that is largely independent of the transmitting sensory modality, which would account for their finding that some monkeys immediately generalized matching of click rate to matching light flicker in the same frequency range (D 'Amato & Salmon, 1984b).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…If we were successful in this objective, our more ambitious aim was to demonstrate the matching concept in the auditory modality. This important question was not explored by Stepien and Cordeau (1960).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Auditory matching-to-sample in monkeys (Cebus apella)

D’Amato

Colombo

1985

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Acqmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Auditory matching-to-sample in monkeys (Cebus apella)

D’Amato

Colombo

1985

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…If all stimuli are acoustic (auditory-auditory, or A-A, matching), then DMTS can be difficult to teach to monkeys (Stepian& Cordeau, 1960;Thompson, 1980;Worsham & D'Amato, 1973). The source of difficulty would not seem to be a deficiency in auditory peripheral processing, since nonhumanprimates have excellent hearing (Fobes & King, 1982).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Delayed matching of visual materials by a bottlenosed dolphin aided by auditory symbols

Forestell

Herman

1988

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A bottlenosed dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) with good underwater and aerial visual acuity was tested in visual matching-to-sample (MTS) paradigms. Attempts to train visual identity MTS directly, using two simple two-dimensional patterns as sample stimuli and as alternatives (comparison stimuli), met with little success, in keeping with previously observed difficulties of this auditory-specialized species for learning complex tasks utilizing simple visual materials. Pairing of each visual sample with a unique sound, to produce a compound auditory-visual sample, while retaining the two visual alternatives, resulted in the dolphin's learning both auditory-visual symbolic matching and visual-visual identity matching. At O-sec delay, performance with the auditory element of the sample alone was equivalent (76%) to performance with the visual element alone; performance with the compound was distinctly better (95%-98% correct). Testing with longer delays using the visual element alone resulted in successful matching through to a maximum delay of 34 sec. These results provided the first demonstration of delayed MTS in a dolphin using visual materials, and complemented other data showing the ready capability of this species for delayed auditory MTS. It appeared that the dolphin solved the visual MTS task by forming auditory codes to represent the visual materials, and that these auditory codes were eventually replaced with purely visual codes.Delayed-matching-to-sample (DMTS) tasks have been used extensively in the analysis of animal memory (Roitblat, 1982). In the typical form of these tasks, a to-beremembered stimulus (the sample) is presented briefly. The animal then indicates its memory for the sample by choosing a matching stimulus from among subsequently offered alternatives. In identity matching, the correct alternative physically matches the sample. In symbolic matching, the alternatives are learned associates of the samples (e.g., D 'Amato & Worsham, 1974;Herman & Thompson, 1982;Roitblat, 1980). For example, a red disk, shownas a sample, may be symbolically represented among the alternatives by an inverted triangle.With rare exceptions, the stimuliused in matchingtests have been limitedto the single,dominantsensorymodality for the species studied. The reason is straightforward: it has proven extremely difficult to teach any animal a DMTS task when task information is given other than through its presumed major sensory interface with its environment. For the pigeon and nonhuman primate, this has been vision. If both sample and alternativesare visual stimuli (visual-visual, or V-V, matching), DMTS is relatively easy to teach these animals (e.g.,

show abstract

Categorization of vocal and nonvocal stimuli in Guinea baboons (Papio papio)

Ennaji

Fagot

Belin

2022

American J Primatol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Categorization of vocal sounds apart from other sounds is one of the key abilities in human voice processing, but whether this ability is present in other animals, particularly non-human primates, remains unclear. In the present study, 25 socially-housed Guinea baboons (Papio papio) were tested on a vocal/non-vocal categorization task using Go/Nogo paradigm implemented on freely accessible automated learning devices. Three individuals from the group successfully learned to sort Grunt vocalizations from non-vocal sounds, and they generalized to new stimuli from the two categories, indicating that some baboons have the ability to develop open-ended categories in the auditory domain. Contrary to our hypothesis based on the human literature, these monkeys learned the non-vocal category faster than the Grunt category. Moreover, they failed to generalize their classification to new classes of conspecific vocalizations (Wahoo, bark, Yak, and copulation calls), and they categorized human vocalizations in the non-vocal category, suggesting that they had failed to represent the task as a vocal vs non vocal categorization problem. Thus, our results do not confirm the existence of a separate perceptual category for conspecific vocalizations in baboons. Interestingly, the three successful baboons are the youngest of the group, with less training in visual tasks, which supports previous reports of age and learning history as crucial factors in auditory laboratory experiments.

show abstract

Memory in Monkeys for Compound Stimuli

Cited by 37 publications

References 0 publications

Auditory matching-to-sample in monkeys (Cebus apella)

Auditory matching-to-sample in monkeys (Cebus apella)

Delayed matching of visual materials by a bottlenosed dolphin aided by auditory symbols

Categorization of vocal and nonvocal stimuli in Guinea baboons (Papio papio)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About