影响空间认知测试的非认知因素的反思:以非模式物种为例。

IF 1.1 4区 心理学 Q4 BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES Journal of Comparative Psychology Pub Date : 2023-05-01 DOI:10.1037/com0000325
Lara D LaDage, Victoria A Gould, Jennifer P Sturgill, Brian D Holsinger, Tracie E Cobb Irvin
{"title":"影响空间认知测试的非认知因素的反思:以非模式物种为例。","authors":"Lara D LaDage,&nbsp;Victoria A Gould,&nbsp;Jennifer P Sturgill,&nbsp;Brian D Holsinger,&nbsp;Tracie E Cobb Irvin","doi":"10.1037/com0000325","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Probing for spatial cognitive processes in model rodent species has a long history in the psychological literature, with well-established protocols and paradigms successfully revealing the mechanisms underlying spatial learning and memory. There has also been much interest in examining the ecological and evolutionary context of spatial cognition, with a focus on how selection has molded spatial cognitive abilities in nonmodel species, how spatial cognitive traits vary across species, the neural mechanisms underlying spatial cognitive abilities, and the fitness outcomes of spatial cognition. Behavioral ecologists have been able to take advantage of paradigms from experimental psychology's rich history of spatial cognitive testing for use in nonmodel species. However, as the field advances, it is important to highlight noncognitive factors that can impact performance on spatial cognitive tasks (e.g., motivation to perform the task, switching navigational strategies, variation across protocols, ecological relevance of the task), as these factors may explain discrepancies in findings among some studies. This review highlights how these noncognitive factors can differentially modulate performance on spatial cognitive tests in different nonmodel species. Accounting for these factors when creating protocols and paradigms allows for a more nuanced approach with more explanatory power when probing for spatial cognitive abilities in nonmodel species. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":54861,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Comparative Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A reflection on noncognitive factors affecting spatial cognitive testing: Examples from nonmodel species.\",\"authors\":\"Lara D LaDage,&nbsp;Victoria A Gould,&nbsp;Jennifer P Sturgill,&nbsp;Brian D Holsinger,&nbsp;Tracie E Cobb Irvin\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/com0000325\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Probing for spatial cognitive processes in model rodent species has a long history in the psychological literature, with well-established protocols and paradigms successfully revealing the mechanisms underlying spatial learning and memory. There has also been much interest in examining the ecological and evolutionary context of spatial cognition, with a focus on how selection has molded spatial cognitive abilities in nonmodel species, how spatial cognitive traits vary across species, the neural mechanisms underlying spatial cognitive abilities, and the fitness outcomes of spatial cognition. Behavioral ecologists have been able to take advantage of paradigms from experimental psychology's rich history of spatial cognitive testing for use in nonmodel species. However, as the field advances, it is important to highlight noncognitive factors that can impact performance on spatial cognitive tasks (e.g., motivation to perform the task, switching navigational strategies, variation across protocols, ecological relevance of the task), as these factors may explain discrepancies in findings among some studies. This review highlights how these noncognitive factors can differentially modulate performance on spatial cognitive tests in different nonmodel species. Accounting for these factors when creating protocols and paradigms allows for a more nuanced approach with more explanatory power when probing for spatial cognitive abilities in nonmodel species. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54861,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Comparative Psychology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Comparative Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/com0000325\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Comparative Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/com0000325","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在心理学文献中,对模型啮齿动物空间认知过程的探索有着悠久的历史,已经建立了完善的协议和范式,成功地揭示了空间学习和记忆的机制。研究空间认知的生态和进化背景也引起了人们的兴趣,重点是选择如何塑造非模式物种的空间认知能力,不同物种的空间认知特征如何变化,空间认知能力的神经机制以及空间认知的适应性结果。行为生态学家已经能够利用实验心理学丰富的空间认知测试历史中的范式,将其用于非模式物种。然而,随着该领域的发展,重要的是要强调可能影响空间认知任务表现的非认知因素(例如,执行任务的动机,切换导航策略,协议之间的变化,任务的生态相关性),因为这些因素可能解释一些研究结果之间的差异。这篇综述强调了这些非认知因素如何在不同的非模式物种中不同地调节空间认知测试的表现。在创建协议和范式时考虑到这些因素,可以在探索非模式物种的空间认知能力时采用更细致的方法,具有更强的解释力。(PsycInfo数据库记录(c) 2023 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。
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
A reflection on noncognitive factors affecting spatial cognitive testing: Examples from nonmodel species.

Probing for spatial cognitive processes in model rodent species has a long history in the psychological literature, with well-established protocols and paradigms successfully revealing the mechanisms underlying spatial learning and memory. There has also been much interest in examining the ecological and evolutionary context of spatial cognition, with a focus on how selection has molded spatial cognitive abilities in nonmodel species, how spatial cognitive traits vary across species, the neural mechanisms underlying spatial cognitive abilities, and the fitness outcomes of spatial cognition. Behavioral ecologists have been able to take advantage of paradigms from experimental psychology's rich history of spatial cognitive testing for use in nonmodel species. However, as the field advances, it is important to highlight noncognitive factors that can impact performance on spatial cognitive tasks (e.g., motivation to perform the task, switching navigational strategies, variation across protocols, ecological relevance of the task), as these factors may explain discrepancies in findings among some studies. This review highlights how these noncognitive factors can differentially modulate performance on spatial cognitive tests in different nonmodel species. Accounting for these factors when creating protocols and paradigms allows for a more nuanced approach with more explanatory power when probing for spatial cognitive abilities in nonmodel species. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

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
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
7.10%
发文量
0
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Comparative Psychology publishes original research from a comparative perspective on the behavior, cognition, perception, and social relationships of diverse species.
期刊最新文献
Hearing "number"?: Relative quantity judgments through the echolocation by bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus). The impact of training method on odor learning and generalization in dogs (Canis lupus familiaris). Cross-modal perception of puppies and adult conspecifics in dogs (Canis familiaris). Putting the best foot forward: Limb lateralization in the Goffin's cockatoo (Cacatua goffiniana). Guatemalan beaded lizards (Helodermatidae: Heloderma charlesbogerti) navigate and follow a scent trail in maze tasks.
×
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