The Development of Visual Perception in Man and Chimpanzee

Riesen, Austin H.

doi:10.1126/science.106.2744.107

Cited by 151 publications

(59 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This points to the necessity of prolonged visual experience, as well as a sufficient neuromuscular maturation, for these kinds of visually guided behaviors in the rhesus monkey. This conclusion is consistent with the protracted learning of visual pattern discriminations by dark-reared chimpanzees, reported by Riesen (1947Riesen ( ,1950. IngeneraI, however, caution must be exercised in extending these conclusions to other species, in viewofthephyletic differences in perceptual development demonstrated by such studies as those of Walk and Gibson (1961).…”

Section: Massodcjst and Wolinsupporting

confidence: 80%

Development of visual acuity in Rhesus monkeys deprived of patterned light during early infancy

1964

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Massodcjst and Wolinsupporting

confidence: 80%

Development of visual acuity in Rhesus monkeys deprived of patterned light during early infancy

1964

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Chimpanzee No. 160, 5-year-old female; experimental history: visual deprivation (6), play (10). 3 Food deprivation: 80 to 85% of body weight at start of experiments.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

STIMULUS‐PRODUCING RESPONSES IN CHIMPANZEES¹

Kelleher

1958

J Exper Analysis Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent analyses of discrimination learning have emphasized a distinction between responses which are instrumental in obtaining food and responses which result in exposure to the discriminative stimuli (2,9, 11). These responses will be classified in terms of their contingencies; that is, a response of the former type will be referred to as a food-producing response (Rf), and a response of the latter type will be referred to as a stimulus-producing response (Rs).Most analyses have dealt with Rs as a theoretical construct to be inferred from Rf performance (2,9). On the other hand, Wyckoff (11) developed a technique for dealing with Rs directly. He used pigeons as Ss in a free-operant situation. The Rf was pecking a translucent key; the Rs was pressing a pedal on the floor of the experimental enclosure. Periods in which Rf was reinforced on a 1/2-minute, fixedinterval schedule (positive periods) alternated randomly with the periods in which there was no possibility of reinforcement (negative periods). The key remained white throughout both positive and negative periods unless Rf occurred; in this case, the key changed from white to red or green. One of these colors was correlated with positive periods and the other with negative periods. Although Rs did not alter the probability of reinforcement, it did enable the bird to discriminate between the two conditions. As long as the pedal was held down, the discriminative stimuli remained on, but the bird had to leave the pedal to eat. The durations of the pedal-pressing responses increased as the discrimination developed, but decreased when the positive and negative stimuli were reversed or made nondifferential. The Wyckoff technique had the disadvantage that the pedal-pressing response had a very high operant level, and frequently the Rs rates were high despite poor discriminations. Wyckoff inferred the strength of Rs from the duration of the response. A temporal response measure makes it difficult to assess the frequency of a response or to schedule the appearance of the stimuli which are contingent upon the response.

show abstract

“…Environmental factors are especially salient during this period, and the effects of early experiences can continue into adulthood (Reisen, 1947). The mother-offspring relationship is often the central mediator of these environmental effects, and thus mothers exert a long-lasting influence on the physiology and behavior of their offspring (Lephart, Watson, Jacobson, Rhees, & Ladle, 1997;Patin et al, 2002;Zhang, Parent, Weaver, & Meaney, 2004).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Early adversity alters attention and locomotion in adult Sprague-Dawley rats.

Burton¹,

Lovic²,

Fleming³

2006

Behavioral Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigated the effects of prenatal stress and its interaction with artificial rearing (AR) on adult rat behavior. Pregnant dams underwent restraint stress from Gestational Day 10 to 21. After parturition, pups were raised by their mothers or in the AR paradigm, with or without stroking stimulation. In adulthood, rats were tested on prepulse inhibition (PPI), locomotor activity, elevated plus-maze, and spatial working memory. There were main effects and interactions of both prenatal stress and AR on activity. Additional stimulation reduced activity in nonstressed AR rats but increased activity in prenatally stressed AR rats. AR altered PPI and plus-maze behavior whereas additional stimulation partially reversed these effects. This study demonstrates that prenatal experiences can modulate the effects of postnatal treatments.

show abstract

The Development of Visual Perception in Man and Chimpanzee

Cited by 151 publications

References 2 publications

Development of visual acuity in Rhesus monkeys deprived of patterned light during early infancy

Development of visual acuity in Rhesus monkeys deprived of patterned light during early infancy

STIMULUS‐PRODUCING RESPONSES IN CHIMPANZEES¹

Early adversity alters attention and locomotion in adult Sprague-Dawley rats.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

The Development of Visual Perception in Man and Chimpanzee

Cited by 151 publications

References 2 publications

Development of visual acuity in Rhesus monkeys deprived of patterned light during early infancy

Development of visual acuity in Rhesus monkeys deprived of patterned light during early infancy

STIMULUS‐PRODUCING RESPONSES IN CHIMPANZEES1

Early adversity alters attention and locomotion in adult Sprague-Dawley rats.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

STIMULUS‐PRODUCING RESPONSES IN CHIMPANZEES¹