Absolute versus relative class conceptual behavior in squirrel monkeys (Saimiri sciureus)

Thomas, Roger K.; Crosby, Thomas N.

doi:10.3758/bf03209238

Cited by 27 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although severalspecies of nonprimate animals have successfully performed tasks that embody absolute class concepts the evidence is weak that nonprimate animals can respond successfully on tasks that embody relative class concepts. The distinction betweenabs?lutean~r~la tive class concepts is based on the operational cntenon of whether it is necessary to compare stimulus choices (Thomas & Crosby, 1977). With absoluteclass concepts, such as "tree," it is not necessary to compare stimulus choices to affirm one that is an exemplar of class' 'tree, " but with relative class concepts, such as oddity, it is necessary to compare stimulus choices to affirm the one that is the exemplar of oddity.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Visual and olfactory oddity learning in rats: What evidence is necessary to show conceptual behavior?

Thomas

Noble

1988

Animal Learning & Behavior

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Experiment 1 involved the use of plastic and wooden objects and trial-unique problems. The rats performed successfully on nonconceptual oddity problems given before and after conceptual training, showing that the testing conditions were suitable, but they showed chance performances on the trial-unique problems. Experiment 2 involved the use of olfactory discriminanda. Five pretraining problems and 300 unique five-trial problems were presented. Two of 3 rats performed better than chance on Trial 2 and on Trials 3-5, but all performed at chance levels on Trial 1 throughout. The data suggest that the rats responded to specific odors on Trials 2-5 following the Trial 1 experience, as opposed to responding conceptuallyto the "odd" odor. Had they responded conceptually to odd odors, they should have performed better than chance on Triall. These findings and the general logical argument that they support are considered in the context ofthe numerous inconclusive reports of the use of the oddity concept by nonprimate animals.In the context of the evolution of intelligence, the oddity concept is an important example of relative class con-

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Visual and olfactory oddity learning in rats: What evidence is necessary to show conceptual behavior?

Thomas

Noble

1988

Animal Learning & Behavior

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…That no single ele ment may be essential to the recognition of a compound is suggested by the work of Morgan et al [1976]. For further discussion of this line of reasoning, see Thomas and Crosby [1977]. Relative class concepts require the subject to compare stimulus choices before it affirms the example of the concept.…”

Section: A Hierarchy Of Intellective Abilitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Using the basic logical operations to define the structures of concepts is well precedented in research on human concept learning [e.g., Bourne, 1970;Haygood and Bourne, 1965;Millward, 1971], and the practicality of using this approach with nonhuman animals has been demonstrated [ Thomas and Crosby, 1977;Thomas and Ingram, 1979]. That the logical operations are hierarchically related is based on Millward's [1971] organ ization of them (which he denoted as levels I, II, and III) based largely on Neisscr and Weene's [1962] observation that the higher levels are defined in terms of the lower levels.…”

Section: A Hierarchy Of Intellective Abilitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evolution of Intelligence: an Approach to Its Assessment

Thomas¹

1980

Brain Behav Evol

Self Cite

133

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The goal was to suggest a meaningful approach to the assessment of intelligence which may be used, for example, in correlational studies with measures of encephalization. Suggesting, as others have done, that species comparisons based on quantitative differences inherently confound intellective with nonintellective abilities, the present approach described a hierarchy of 8 basic levels of qualitatively different intellective (learning) abilities. The levels range from habituation to complex concepts. Practical procedures and strategies which, ancrease the precision of the scale were described.

show abstract

“…It can be presumed that the sea lion in the present study might have reached criterion in the three-position oddity condition with more five-trial problems. However, two-position oddity improves the chances of correct responding, owing to the elimination of the central position as a rewarded choice, and it may be speculated that the Gestalt resulting from the two non-odd and perceptually identical objects' being adjacent offers advantages in discrimination (Thomas & Crosby, 1977). As our sea lion started to show poor motivation, we decided to change the experimental procedure accordingly.…”

Section: The Sea Lion's Performance During the Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…On the basis of logical operations (negation, conjunction, disjunction, and implication) derived from more philosophical considerations (Turner, 1967), Thomas and Crosby (1977) provided a short but valuable definition of class concepts as opposed to relational concepts. This distinction was also implemented in the learning-intelligence hierarchy presented by Thomas (1980), which is largely a synthesis of the hierarchy of learning types described by Gagné (1970) and the concept-learning hierarchy described by Bourne (1970).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

An analysis of visual oddity concept learning in a California sea lion (Zalophus californianus)

Hille¹,

Dehnhardt²,

Mauck³

2006

Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We tested a California sea lion for visual oddity learning by presenting problems composed of three two-dimensional black-and-white stimuli, two identical (S ) and one different (S ). In the first experimental stage, a single problem per session was presented until learning criterion was reached. In the second experimental stage, all problems were presented only five times in succession; then a new problem was introduced (six problems/session). In the third experimental stage, each problem was presented only once. The sea lion mastered all stages of oddity learning. A final transfer test with oddity problems composed of completely new stimuli yielded performance significantly above chance. Data analyses suggested learning of specific stimulus properties in the first stage, learning set formation in the second stage, but oddity conceptualization in the third stage.

show abstract

Absolute versus relative class conceptual behavior in squirrel monkeys (Saimiri sciureus)

Cited by 27 publications

References 17 publications

Visual and olfactory oddity learning in rats: What evidence is necessary to show conceptual behavior?

Visual and olfactory oddity learning in rats: What evidence is necessary to show conceptual behavior?

Evolution of Intelligence: an Approach to Its Assessment

An analysis of visual oddity concept learning in a California sea lion (Zalophus californianus)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About