↓ Skip to main content

Imitative learning in Japanese quail (Coturnix japonica) using the bidirectional control procedure

Overview of attention for article published in Learning & Behavior, August 2002
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

wikipedia
5 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
50 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
71 Mendeley
Title
Imitative learning in Japanese quail (Coturnix japonica) using the bidirectional control procedure
Published in
Learning & Behavior, August 2002
DOI 10.3758/bf03192836
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chana K. Akins, Emily D. Klein, Thomas R. Zentall

Abstract

In the bidirectional control procedure, observers are exposed to a conspecific demonstrator responding to a manipulandum in one of two directions (e.g., left vs. right). This procedure controls for socially mediated effects (the mere presence of a conspecific) and stimulus enhancement (attention drawn to a manipulandum by its movement), and it has the added advantage of being symmetrical (the two different responses are similar in topography). Imitative learning is demonstrated when the observers make the response in the direction that they observed it being made. Recently, however, it has been suggested that when such evidence is found with a predominantly olfactory animal, such as the rat, it may result artifactually from odor cues left on one side of the manipulandum by the demonstrator. In the present experiment, we found that Japanese quail, for which odor cues are not likely to play a role, also showed significant correspondence between the direction in which the demonstrator and the observer push a screen to gain access to reward. Furthermore, control quail that observed the screen move, when the movement of the screen was not produced by the demonstrator, did not show similar correspondence between the direction of screen movement observed and that performed by the observer. Thus, with the appropriate control, the bidirectional procedure appears to be useful for studying imitation in avian species.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 3%
Italy 1 1%
Unknown 68 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 16 23%
Researcher 15 21%
Student > Master 10 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 10%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 9 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 29 41%
Psychology 14 20%
Neuroscience 4 6%
Unspecified 1 1%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 1%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 15 21%
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 09 February 2021.
All research outputs
#8,533,995
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Learning & Behavior
#222
of 904 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,693
of 48,160 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Learning & Behavior
#1
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 904 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its peers.
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 48,160 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them