↓ Skip to main content

“Insight” in pigeons: absence of means–end processing in displacement tests

Overview of attention for article published in Animal Cognition, June 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
54 Mendeley
Title
“Insight” in pigeons: absence of means–end processing in displacement tests
Published in
Animal Cognition, June 2013
DOI 10.1007/s10071-013-0653-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Robert G. Cook, Catherine Fowler

Abstract

The understanding of functional relations between action and consequence is a critical component of intelligence. To examine this linkage in pigeons, we investigated their understanding of the relations of the elements tested in an extension of Köhler's box stacking task to this species. In the experiments, the pigeons had to move a spatially displaced box under an out-of-reach target. Experiment 1 successfully replicated and extended the previous finding showing that when separately trained to move a box and stand on it to peck the target, pigeons can synthesize these behaviors to solve the single-box displacement problem quickly on their first attempt. Experiment 2 tested whether pigeons, when given a simultaneous choice between two boxes with identical reinforcement histories, would selectively choose the box with the correct functional affordance (i.e., permitting standing) to solve the problem rather than a non-functional one. Their extensive, equivalent, and undirected behavior in moving both boxes during these tests suggests the pigeons did not possess a means-end understanding of the functional properties of the boxes. Instead, their results were consistent with an analysis of their earlier synthetic behavior as being due to the temporal and spatial relations of the physical elements in the task and their prior learned behaviors.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Russia 2 4%
Italy 1 2%
Hungary 1 2%
Austria 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 48 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 17%
Researcher 9 17%
Student > Bachelor 5 9%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 4 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 7%
Other 17 31%
Unknown 6 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 19 35%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 28%
Social Sciences 2 4%
Physics and Astronomy 2 4%
Linguistics 1 2%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 9 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 February 2014.
All research outputs
#14,327,650
of 24,943,708 outputs
Outputs from Animal Cognition
#1,109
of 1,553 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#105,575
of 202,131 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Animal Cognition
#11
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,943,708 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,553 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.8. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 202,131 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.