invisible displacement
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

32
(FIVE YEARS 2)

H-INDEX

15
(FIVE YEARS 0)

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Vilain Rørvang ◽  
Klára Ničová ◽  
Hanna Sassner ◽  
Christian Nawroth

Many frameworks have assessed the ultimate and ontogenetic underpinnings in the development of object permanence, but less is known about whether individual characteristics, such as sex or training level, as well as proximate factors, such as arousal or emotional state, affect performance in these tasks. The current study investigated horses’ performance in visible and invisible displacement tasks and assessed whether specific ontogenetic, behavioral, and physiological factors were associated with performance. The study included 39 Icelandic horses aged 2–25 years, of varying training levels. The horses were exposed to three tasks: (a) a choice test (n = 37), (b) a visible displacement task (n = 35), and (c) an invisible displacement task (n = 31). 27 horses in the choice test, and 8 horses in the visible displacement task, performed significantly better than expected by chance, while none did so in the invisible displacement task. This was also reflected in their group performance, where horses performed above chance level in the choice task and the visible displacement task only. In the invisible displacement task, the group performed significantly worse than expected by chance indicating that horses persistently chose the side where they had last seen the target. None of the individual characteristics included in the study had an effect on performance. Unsuccessful horses had higher heart rate levels, and expressed more behavior indicative of frustration, likely because of their inability to solve the task. The increased frustration/arousal could lead to a negative feedback loop, which might hamper performance in subsequent trials. Care should thus be taken in future experimental designs to closely monitor the arousal level of the tested individuals in order to safeguard comparability.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Vilain Rørvang ◽  
Klára Nicova ◽  
Hanna Sassner ◽  
Christian Nawroth

Many frameworks have assessed the ultimate and ontogenetic underpinnings in the development of object permanence, but less is known about whether individual characteristics, such as sex or training level, as well as proximate factors, such as arousal or emotional state, affect performance in these tasks. The current study investigated horses’ performance in visible and invisible displacement tasks and investigated whether specific ontogenetic, behavioral and physiological factors were associated with performance. The study included 39 Icelandic horses aged 2–25 years, of varying training levels. The horses were exposed to three tasks: a) a choice test (n=37), b) a visible displacement task (n=35), and c) an invisible displacement task (n=31). 27 horses in the choice test, and 8 horses in the visible displacement task, performed significantly better than expected by chance, while none did so in the invisible displacement task. This was also reflected in their group performance, where horses performed above chance level in the choice task and the visible displacement task only. In the invisible displacement task, the group performed significantly worse than expected by chance indicating that horses persistently chose the side where they had last seen the target. None of the individual characteristics included in the study had an effect on performance. Unsuccessful horses showed higher heart rate levels, and expressed more behavior indicative of frustration, likely because of their inability to solve the task. The increased frustration/arousal could lead to a negative feedback loop, which might hamperperformance in subsequent trials. Care should thus be taken in future experimental designs to closely monitor the arousal level of the tested individuals in order to safeguard comparability.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine Johnson ◽  
Jess Sullivan ◽  
Cara Buck ◽  
Julie Trexel ◽  
Michael Scarpuzzi

Anticipating the location of a temporarily obscured target—what Piaget (the construction of reality in the child. Basic Books, New York, 1954) called ‘‘objectpermanence’’—is a critical skill, especially in hunters of mobile prey. Previous research with bottlenose dolphins found they could predict the location of a target that had been visibly displaced into an opaque container, but not one that was first placed in an opaque container and then invisibly displaced to another container. We tested whether, by altering the task to involve occlusion rather than containment, these animals could show more advanced object permanence skills. We projected dynamic visual displays at an underwater-viewing window and videotaped the animals’ head moves while observing these displays. In Experiment 1, the animals observed a small black disk moving behind occluders that shifted in size, ultimately forming one large occluder. Nine out of ten subjects ‘‘tracked’’ the presumed movement of the disk behind this occluder on their first trial—and in a statistically significant number of subsequent trials—confirming their visible displacement abilities. In Experiment 2, we tested their invisible displacement abilities. The disk first disappeared behind a pair of moving occluders, which then moved behind a stationary occluder. The moving occluders then reappeared and separated, revealing that the disk was no longer behind them. The subjects subsequently looked to the correct stationary occluder on eight of their ten first trials, and in a statistically significant number of subsequent trials. Thus, by altering the stimuli to be more ecologically valid, we were able to show that the dolphins could indeed succeed at an invisible displacement task.


2020 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Miléna Trösch ◽  
Anna Flamand ◽  
Manon Chasles ◽  
Raymond Nowak ◽  
Ludovic Calandreau ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 179-193 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine M. Johnson ◽  
Jess Sullivan ◽  
Cara L. Buck ◽  
Julie Trexel ◽  
Mike Scarpuzzi

Primates ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 55 (4) ◽  
pp. 549-557
Author(s):  
Suma Mallavarapu ◽  
Tara S. Stoinski ◽  
Bonnie M. Perdue ◽  
Terry L. Maple

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document