狼和狗的推理:杯子任务 "再探讨

Dániel Rivas-Blanco, Sophia D. Krause, Sarah Marshall-Pescini, Friederike Range
{"title":"狼和狗的推理:杯子任务 \"再探讨","authors":"Dániel Rivas-Blanco, Sophia D. Krause, Sarah Marshall-Pescini, Friederike Range","doi":"10.1101/2024.09.03.610928","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Inferential reasoning —the process of arriving at a conclusion from a series of premises— has been studied in a multitude of animal species through the use of the \"cups task\" paradigm. In one of the versions of this set-up, two opaque cups —one baited, one empty— are shaken in front of the animal. As only the baited cup makes a noise when shaken, the animals can locate the reward by inferring that only a baited cup would make noise, that an empty cup would make no noise, or both. In a previous iteration of this paradigm in wolves (Canis lupus) and dogs (Canis familiaris), wolves seemed to outperform dogs. However, due to the lack of control conditions, it was not possible to assess each species' inference capabilities, nor how they related to each other. The current study adds several conditions in which the baited cup, the empty cup, or no cups are shaken, in order to tackle this issue. Our results seem to indicate that wolves and dogs made their choices not based on inference but on the saliency and order of the stimuli presented, something that seems in line with the previous study. We discuss the potential causes behind the animals' performance, as well as proposing alternative paradigms that may be more apt to measure inference abilities in wolves and dogs.","PeriodicalId":501210,"journal":{"name":"bioRxiv - Animal Behavior and Cognition","volume":"54 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Inference in wolves and dogs: The \\\"cups task\\\", revisited\",\"authors\":\"Dániel Rivas-Blanco, Sophia D. Krause, Sarah Marshall-Pescini, Friederike Range\",\"doi\":\"10.1101/2024.09.03.610928\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Inferential reasoning —the process of arriving at a conclusion from a series of premises— has been studied in a multitude of animal species through the use of the \\\"cups task\\\" paradigm. In one of the versions of this set-up, two opaque cups —one baited, one empty— are shaken in front of the animal. As only the baited cup makes a noise when shaken, the animals can locate the reward by inferring that only a baited cup would make noise, that an empty cup would make no noise, or both. In a previous iteration of this paradigm in wolves (Canis lupus) and dogs (Canis familiaris), wolves seemed to outperform dogs. However, due to the lack of control conditions, it was not possible to assess each species' inference capabilities, nor how they related to each other. The current study adds several conditions in which the baited cup, the empty cup, or no cups are shaken, in order to tackle this issue. Our results seem to indicate that wolves and dogs made their choices not based on inference but on the saliency and order of the stimuli presented, something that seems in line with the previous study. We discuss the potential causes behind the animals' performance, as well as proposing alternative paradigms that may be more apt to measure inference abilities in wolves and dogs.\",\"PeriodicalId\":501210,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"bioRxiv - Animal Behavior and Cognition\",\"volume\":\"54 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"bioRxiv - Animal Behavior and Cognition\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.09.03.610928\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"bioRxiv - Animal Behavior and Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.09.03.610928","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

推理--从一系列前提得出结论的过程--已经通过 "杯子任务 "范式在多种动物身上进行了研究。在其中一个版本的设置中,两个不透明的杯子--一个有诱饵,一个是空的--在动物面前晃动。由于只有装有诱饵的杯子在摇动时会发出声音,动物可以通过推断只有装有诱饵的杯子会发出声音、空杯子不会发出声音或两者都会发出声音来找到奖励。之前在狼和狗的实验中,狼的表现似乎优于狗。但是,由于缺乏控制条件,因此无法评估每个物种的推理能力,也无法评估它们之间的关系。为了解决这个问题,本研究增加了摇动诱饵杯、空杯或不摇动杯子的几种条件。我们的研究结果似乎表明,狼和狗的选择不是基于推理,而是基于刺激物的显著性和顺序,这似乎与之前的研究结果一致。我们讨论了动物表现背后的潜在原因,并提出了可能更适合测量狼和狗推理能力的替代范式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Inference in wolves and dogs: The "cups task", revisited
Inferential reasoning —the process of arriving at a conclusion from a series of premises— has been studied in a multitude of animal species through the use of the "cups task" paradigm. In one of the versions of this set-up, two opaque cups —one baited, one empty— are shaken in front of the animal. As only the baited cup makes a noise when shaken, the animals can locate the reward by inferring that only a baited cup would make noise, that an empty cup would make no noise, or both. In a previous iteration of this paradigm in wolves (Canis lupus) and dogs (Canis familiaris), wolves seemed to outperform dogs. However, due to the lack of control conditions, it was not possible to assess each species' inference capabilities, nor how they related to each other. The current study adds several conditions in which the baited cup, the empty cup, or no cups are shaken, in order to tackle this issue. Our results seem to indicate that wolves and dogs made their choices not based on inference but on the saliency and order of the stimuli presented, something that seems in line with the previous study. We discuss the potential causes behind the animals' performance, as well as proposing alternative paradigms that may be more apt to measure inference abilities in wolves and dogs.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Emotional contexts influence vocal individuality in ungulates Athene cunicularia hypugaea wintering in a central California urban setting arrive later, leave earlier, prefer sheltered micro-habitat, tolerate rain, and contend with diverse predators Monkeys Predict US Elections Meat transfers follow social ties in the multi-level society of Guinea baboons but are not related to male reproductive success Jumping spiders are not fooled by the peripheral drift illusion
×
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