Social discrimination and aggressive pecking in domestic chicks.

Rajecki, D. W.; Ivins, Barbara; Rein, Barbara

doi:10.1037/h0077212

Cited by 44 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The present experiments reveal that chicks 2 days old discriminate and preferentially respond to conspecifics in the absence of strain or color differences, thus confirming the results of Rajecki et al (1976) and Zajonc et al (1975). The discrimination appears to be based upon differences in behavior between the two targets, and furthermore, prior social experience is not necessary for the discrimination to occur.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 74%

“…One of these is the different vocalizations of the social and isolate targets. The social targets tended to emit contentment calls, while the isolate targets tended to emit distress calls, a fmding in agreement with Rajecki et al (1976). It is feasible that distress and contentment calls are differentially attractive to chicks.…”

Section: It Is Not Clear Which Component Of the Targets'supporting

confidence: 53%

“…Requests for reprints should be addressed to S, E. Sigman, Department of Psychology, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia 24061. butes to and facilitates the identification of individuals. These and other data (Kilham, Klopfer, & Oelke, 1968;Rajecki, Ivins, & Rein, 1976) demonstrate the ability of newly hatched chicks to distinguish between conspecifics on the basis of some stimulus characteristic other than color. The particular aspect of their companions which chicks use as a basis for differentiation is not known.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Preferential approach to conspecifics as a function of different rearing conditions

Sigman

Lovern

Schulman

1978

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Forty-six White Leghorn chicks were tested at 48 h posthatch to determine their ability to discriminate and preferentially respond to individual companions and strangers. In the first experiment, socially reared chicks showed no preference when allowed a simultaneous choice between either a familiar or an unfamiliar socially reared chick. In the second experiment, socially reared chicks preferred (p = .012) an unfamiliar socially reared chick to an unfamiliar chick reared in isolation. In the third experiment, chicks reared in isolation preferred (p = .0361 a socially reared chick to an isolation-reared chick. Results indicate that chicks 48 hold respond to others on the basis of behavioral as well as morphological characteristics.Adult chickens are able to recognize individual conspecifics as evidenced in the establishment of dominance hierarchies (Schelderup-Ebbe, 1935). However, the age at which social discriminations first appear and the conditions necessary for the formation of such discriminations are not well established. In an early imprinting study, Smith (1957) presented evidence that chicks 10 days old are able to discriminate flock mates from unfamiliar birds. Others have also shown that chicks recognize individuals, and begin to establish peck orders at about 18 days of age (Guhl, 1958). Since these early reports, it has become abundantly clear that chicks make social discriminations at much earlier ages. For example, Rajecki and Lake (1972) have demonstrated that DeKalb hybrid chicks dyed red, yellow, or green and housed in pairs of similar colors prefer chicks of their own color when tested 24 h posthatch. Chicks dyed the same color and reared in isolation exhibit no preference for one color over the other, These results confirm those of Salzen and Cornell (1968) with birds 9 days old and indicate that these neonates imprint on, and prefer others similar to, their cagemates.More recently, Zajonc, Wilson, and Rajecki (1975) have presented data on pecking which indicate that domestic chicks are able to recognize individual strangers and companions as early as 24 h posthatch, and furthermore, color differences facilitate, but are not necessary for, these discriminations. Evidence was also obtained that close physical interaction contri-

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 74%

Section: It Is Not Clear Which Component Of the Targets'supporting

confidence: 53%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Preferential approach to conspecifics as a function of different rearing conditions

Sigman

Lovern

Schulman

1978

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These findings are reiterated by the fact that shortly after hatching, domestic chicks become capable of discriminating between individual conspecifics, at least to the level of the distinction between familiar and non-familiar individuals. Following approximately 12 hours of direct contact (Porter et al 2005), chicks will prefer to remain near their cage mates (Riedstra & Groothuis 2002) and will have a tendency to peck more often at an unfamiliar partner (Rajecki et al 1976). Indeed, the frequency of pecks directed at familiar and unfamiliar conspecifics appears to be the most sensitive measure of social discrimination in young birds (cf.…”

Section: Lateralization Of Preference For Face-like Configurationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lateralization of social cognition in the domestic chicken (Gallus gallus)

Daisley

Mascalzoni

Rosa‐Salva

et al. 2008

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, we report on the ongoing work in our laboratories on the effect of lateralization produced by light exposure in the egg on social cognition in the domestic chick (Gallus gallus). The domestic chick possesses a lateralized visual system. This has effects on the chick's perception towards and interaction with its environment. This includes its ability to live successfully within a social group. We show that there is a tendency for right brain hemisphere dominance when performing social cognitive actions. As such, chicks show a left hemispatial bias for approaching a signalled target object, tend to perceive gaze and faces of human-like masks more effectively when using their left eye, are able to inhibit a pecking response more effectively when viewing a neighbour tasting a bitter substance with their left eye, and are better able to perform a transitive inference task when exposed to light in the egg and when forced to use their left eye only compared to dark-hatched or right eye chicks. Some of these effects were sex specific, with male chicks tending to show an increased effect of lateralization on their behaviours. These data are discussed in terms of overall social cognition in group living.

show abstract

“…This intersubject pecking has been attributed to an aggressive motivation based on the force of the peck in ducklings [Hoffman et al, 19741, the reaction of the recipient of the peck in ducklings [Hoffman and Boskoff, 1972;Hoffman et al, 19751, and peck locus in chicks [Rajecki et al, 1976 In an effort to identify factors that mediate the exaggerated pecking of former isolates, Hoffman et a1 [1975] reared some ducklings with animated foam rubber objects. This imprinting procedure produced social pecking rates that were much lower than those emitted by total isolates, but which were statistically indistinguishable from rates emitted by ducklings reared in pairs.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mediating factors in chick social pecking: 1. Effects of isolation, imprinting, and peer contact

1978

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two experiments examined the influence of periods of social isolation on rates of intersubject pecking in pairs of domestic chicks. Of central interest was the effect of an imprinting condition wherein single birds were reared with either a red or green Styrofoam object. In the first experiment, imprinted subjects were given social pecking tests in the absence of the imprinting object, while in the second study the tests for social pecking were conducted in the presence of one of the imprinting objects. In the latter test the object was familiar to one bud of a pair, but was novel to the other animal. The results of both experiments showed that the rate of intersubject pecking of the imprinted subjects was intermediate to, and statistically different from both the low pecking rate of chicks reared in pairs and the high pecking rate of chicks reared in total isolation. The presence of a familiar object during tests in the second study seemed to serve as a secure base since chicks that had been reared with that object exhibited more social pecking than did chicks that were unfamiliar with the object. However, regardless of the provision of the object the social pecking of the imprinted chicks again fell on a point intermediate to the other groups. Hypotheses concerning a) intolerance of figureground movement and b) sheer stress of isolation were advanced to account for these results.

show abstract

Social discrimination and aggressive pecking in domestic chicks.

Cited by 44 publications

References 41 publications

Preferential approach to conspecifics as a function of different rearing conditions

Preferential approach to conspecifics as a function of different rearing conditions

Lateralization of social cognition in the domestic chicken (Gallus gallus)

Mediating factors in chick social pecking: 1. Effects of isolation, imprinting, and peer contact

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About