Use of different attentional strategies by pigeons and humans in multidimensional visual search.

IF 1.2 4区 心理学 Q4 BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES Journal of Experimental Psychology-Animal Learning and Cognition Pub Date : 2022-01-01 Epub Date: 2021-11-15 DOI:10.1037/xan0000310
Suzanne L Gray, Muhammad A J Qadri, Daniel I Brooks, Robert G Cook
{"title":"Use of different attentional strategies by pigeons and humans in multidimensional visual search.","authors":"Suzanne L Gray,&nbsp;Muhammad A J Qadri,&nbsp;Daniel I Brooks,&nbsp;Robert G Cook","doi":"10.1037/xan0000310","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>To study comparative attentional allocation strategies, pigeons and humans were tested using simultaneously available discrimination tasks. Given visual search displays containing 32 items from two orthogonal dimensions, participants were reinforced for selecting the eight brightest (or darkest) of 16 brightness items and the eight most vertical (or horizontal) of 16 orientation items. Consistent with a sequential dimensional strategy, humans preferentially chose items from one dimension before switching to the other to complete the search. In contrast, the pigeons did not preferentially stay within one dimension over consecutive choices. Instead, they chose the items most likely to yield reward based on item discriminability. Computational models that incorporated a \"dimensional staying\" factor accounted best for the human data, while simulations using only discriminability reproduced the pigeons' data. These results suggest that humans are sensitive to the benefits of attentional staying and the costs of switching between dimensional tasks, while there was no evidence that these factors influenced the pigeons' choice behavior. These findings suggest fundamental differences in how pigeons and humans allocate attention in complex choice situations. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":54259,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Psychology-Animal Learning and Cognition","volume":"48 1","pages":"46-59"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Experimental Psychology-Animal Learning and Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/xan0000310","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/11/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

To study comparative attentional allocation strategies, pigeons and humans were tested using simultaneously available discrimination tasks. Given visual search displays containing 32 items from two orthogonal dimensions, participants were reinforced for selecting the eight brightest (or darkest) of 16 brightness items and the eight most vertical (or horizontal) of 16 orientation items. Consistent with a sequential dimensional strategy, humans preferentially chose items from one dimension before switching to the other to complete the search. In contrast, the pigeons did not preferentially stay within one dimension over consecutive choices. Instead, they chose the items most likely to yield reward based on item discriminability. Computational models that incorporated a "dimensional staying" factor accounted best for the human data, while simulations using only discriminability reproduced the pigeons' data. These results suggest that humans are sensitive to the benefits of attentional staying and the costs of switching between dimensional tasks, while there was no evidence that these factors influenced the pigeons' choice behavior. These findings suggest fundamental differences in how pigeons and humans allocate attention in complex choice situations. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
鸽子和人类在多维视觉搜索中不同注意策略的使用。
为了研究比较注意分配策略,鸽子和人类使用同时可用的辨别任务进行了测试。给定视觉搜索显示,包含来自两个正交维度的32个项目,参与者被要求从16个亮度项目中选择8个最亮(或最暗)的项目,从16个方向项目中选择8个最垂直(或水平)的项目。与顺序维度策略一致,人类优先从一个维度选择项目,然后切换到另一个维度来完成搜索。相比之下,鸽子在连续的选择中不会优先停留在一个维度上。相反,他们会根据物品的可辨别性选择最有可能产生奖励的物品。包含“维度停留”因素的计算模型最能解释人类的数据,而只使用可判别性的模拟再现了鸽子的数据。这些结果表明,人类对注意力停留的好处和在不同维度任务之间切换的代价很敏感,而没有证据表明这些因素影响了鸽子的选择行为。这些发现表明,鸽子和人类在复杂选择情况下分配注意力的方式存在根本差异。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA,版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Experimental Psychology-Animal Learning and Cognition
Journal of Experimental Psychology-Animal Learning and Cognition Psychology-Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
23.10%
发文量
39
期刊介绍: The Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Learning and Cognition publishes experimental and theoretical studies concerning all aspects of animal behavior processes.
期刊最新文献
Explicit and implicit intermixed-blocked effects in the absence of instructions requiring the search for differences between visual stimuli. Novelty mismatch as a determinant of latent inhibition. Extinction induced representational change. Symmetrical "super learning": Enhancing causal learning using a bidirectional probabilistic outcome. Impact of equivalence class training on same/different learning by pigeons.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1