Abstract Concept - Explore the Science & Experts | ideXlab

Scan Science and Technology

Contact Leading Edge Experts & Companies

Abstract Concept

The Experts below are selected from a list of 317859 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Abstract Concept – Free Register to Access Experts & Abstracts

Jeffrey S. Katz – One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Matching-to-sample AbstractConcept learning by dogs (Canis familiaris).
    Journal of experimental psychology. Animal learning and cognition, 2021
    Co-Authors: Lucia Lazarowski, Adam Davila, Sarah Krichbaum, Emma Cox, Jordan G Smith, L Paul Waggoner, Jeffrey S. Katz
    Abstract:

    The Abstract Concept of sameness forms the basis of higher-order cognitive operations, including mathematics and language. Historically believed to be unique to humans, evidence of AbstractConcept learning in recent decades has been demonstrated in a range of phylogenetically diverse species, indicating that the ability to judge sameness relations is a general process resulting from convergent evolution. However, to date, no research has demonstrated evidence of such learning in any canid species. We trained domestic dogs (n = 6) on a two-choice olfactory matching-to-sample task using a training set of 48 odors in trial-unique sessions. Upon meeting an acquisition criterion (two consecutive sessions ≥ 83% correct), we assessed AbstractConcept learning by testing for transfer to novel odors. Dogs matched novel odors with above-chance accuracy and exceeded baseline levels, satisfying previously proposed criteria for full AbstractConcept learning. Our findings provide the first evidence of MTS Concept learning in dogs, illustrating qualitative similarities with other species. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

  • Issues in the comparative cognition of same/different AbstractConcept learning
    Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 2021
    Co-Authors: Jeffrey S. Katz, Anthony A. Wright
    Abstract:

    Same/different AbstractConcept learning provides a basis for higher order learning. We present criteria (e.g. the use of novel items, how to reinforce responding, achieving full Concept learning) for evaluating evidence of AbstractConcept learning. We discuss how revealing functional relationships also are critical for understanding how Abstract Concepts are learned. To illustrate our points, data from six diverse species are presented. The findings reveal quantitative differences in learning with all species achieving full AbstractConcept learning. We conclude that same/different AbstractConcept learning is an example of convergent evolution shared amongst mammalian and non-mammalian species.

  • Comparing cognition by integrating Concept learning, proactive interference, and list memory
    Learning & Behavior, 2018
    Co-Authors: Anthony A. Wright, Debbie M. Kelly, Jeffrey S. Katz
    Abstract:

    This article describes an approach for training a variety of species to learn the Abstract Concept of same/different, which in turn forms the basis for testing proactive interference and list memory. The stimulus set for Concept-learning training was progressively doubled from 8, 16, 32, 64, 128 . . . to 1,024 different pictures with novel-stimulus transfer following learning. All species fully learned the same/different Abstract Concept: capuchin and rhesus monkeys learned more readily than pigeons; nutcrackers and magpies were at least equivalent to monkeys and transferred somewhat better following initial training sets. A similar task using the 1,024-picture set plus delays was used to test proactive interference on occasional trials. Pigeons revealed greater interference with 10-s than with 1-s delays, whereas delay time had no effect on rhesus monkeys, suggesting that the monkeys’ interference was event based. This same single-item same/different task was expanded to a 4-item list memory task to test animal list memory. Humans were tested similarly with lists of kaleidoscope pictures. Delays between the list and test were manipulated, resulting in strong initial recency effects (i.e., strong 4th-item memory) at short delays and changing to a strong primacy effect (i.e., strong 1st-item memory) at long delays (pigeons 0-s to 10-s delays; monkeys 0-s to 30-s delays; humans 0-s to 100-s delays). Results and findings are discussed in terms of these species’ cognition and memory comparisons, evolutionary implications, and future directions for testing other species in these synergistically related tasks.

Anthony A. Wright – One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Issues in the comparative cognition of same/different AbstractConcept learning
    Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 2021
    Co-Authors: Jeffrey S. Katz, Anthony A. Wright
    Abstract:

    Same/different AbstractConcept learning provides a basis for higher order learning. We present criteria (e.g. the use of novel items, how to reinforce responding, achieving full Concept learning) for evaluating evidence of AbstractConcept learning. We discuss how revealing functional relationships also are critical for understanding how Abstract Concepts are learned. To illustrate our points, data from six diverse species are presented. The findings reveal quantitative differences in learning with all species achieving full AbstractConcept learning. We conclude that same/different AbstractConcept learning is an example of convergent evolution shared amongst mammalian and non-mammalian species.

  • Comparing cognition by integrating Concept learning, proactive interference, and list memory
    Learning & Behavior, 2018
    Co-Authors: Anthony A. Wright, Debbie M. Kelly, Jeffrey S. Katz
    Abstract:

    This article describes an approach for training a variety of species to learn the Abstract Concept of same/different, which in turn forms the basis for testing proactive interference and list memory. The stimulus set for Concept-learning training was progressively doubled from 8, 16, 32, 64, 128 . . . to 1,024 different pictures with novel-stimulus transfer following learning. All species fully learned the same/different Abstract Concept: capuchin and rhesus monkeys learned more readily than pigeons; nutcrackers and magpies were at least equivalent to monkeys and transferred somewhat better following initial training sets. A similar task using the 1,024-picture set plus delays was used to test proactive interference on occasional trials. Pigeons revealed greater interference with 10-s than with 1-s delays, whereas delay time had no effect on rhesus monkeys, suggesting that the monkeys’ interference was event based. This same single-item same/different task was expanded to a 4-item list memory task to test animal list memory. Humans were tested similarly with lists of kaleidoscope pictures. Delays between the list and test were manipulated, resulting in strong initial recency effects (i.e., strong 4th-item memory) at short delays and changing to a strong primacy effect (i.e., strong 1st-item memory) at long delays (pigeons 0-s to 10-s delays; monkeys 0-s to 30-s delays; humans 0-s to 100-s delays). Results and findings are discussed in terms of these species’ cognition and memory comparisons, evolutionary implications, and future directions for testing other species in these synergistically related tasks.

  • AbstractConcept learning in Black-billed magpies (Pica hudsonia).
    Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2016
    Co-Authors: John F. Magnotti, Anthony A. Wright, Jeffrey S. Katz, Kevin Leonard, Debbie M. Kelly
    Abstract:

    relational Concepts depend upon relationships between stimuli (e.g., same vs. different) and transcend features of the training stimuli. Recent evidence shows that learning Abstract Concepts is shared across a variety species including birds. Our recent work with a highly-skilled food-storing bird, Clark’s nutcracker, revealed superior same/different AbstractConcept learning compared to rhesus monkeys, capuchin monkeys, and pigeons. Here we test a more social, but less reliant on food-storing, corvid species, the Black-billed magpie (Pica hudsonia). We used the same procedures and training exemplars (eight pairs of the same rule, and 56 pairs of the different rule) as were used to test the other species. Magpies (n = 10) showed a level of AbstractConcept learning that was equivalent to nutcrackers and greater than the primates and pigeons tested with these same exemplars. These findings suggest that superior initial AbstractConcept learning abilities may be shared across corvids generally, rather than confined to those strongly reliant on spatial memory.

Cait Newport – One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Abstract Concept learning in fish
    Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 2021
    Co-Authors: Cait Newport
    Abstract:

    Abstract Concept formation allows animals to group stimuli based on relationships (e.g. sameness/difference) rather than stimulus-specific qualities. Studies in this field have focused on primates and birds, but there is growing interest in the capabilities of a wider range of species to gain an understanding of differences in cognitive abilities across taxa and ecological requirements. This review concentrates on Abstract Concept learning in fish. There have been only a few studies testing this group and these have resulted in no direct evidence of Abstract Concept learning. Further experiments following rigorous methodologies are required to determine whether all fish species are truly incapable, or whether the right learning conditions have not yet been met for the appropriate species.

  • Same/Different Abstract Concept Learning by Archerfish (Toxotes chatareus).
    PloS one, 2015
    Co-Authors: Cait Newport, Guy Wallis, Ulrike E. Siebeck
    Abstract:

    While several phylogenetically diverse species have proved capable of learning Abstract Concepts, previous attempts to teach fish have been unsuccessful. In this report, the ability of archerfish (Toxotes chatareus) to learn the Concepts of sameness and difference using a simultaneous two-item discrimination task was tested. Six archerfish were trained to either select a pair of same or different stimuli which were presented simultaneously. Training consisted of a 2-phase approach. Training phase 1: the symbols in the same and different pair did not change, thereby allowing the fish to solve the test through direct association. The fish were trained consecutively with four different sets of stimuli to familiarize them with the general procedure before moving on to the next training phase. Training phase 2: six different symbols were used to form the same or different pairs. After acquisition, same/different Concept learning was tested by presenting fish with six novel stimuli (transfer test). Five fish successfully completed the first training phase. Only one individual passed the second training phase, however, transfer performance was consistent with chance. This individual was given further training using 60 training exemplars but the individual was unable to reach the training criterion. We hypothesize that archerfish are able to solve a limited version of the same/different test by learning the response to each possible stimulus configuration or by developing a series of relatively simple choice contingencies. We conclude that the simultaneous two-item discrimination task we describe cannot be successfully used to test the Concepts of same and different in archerfish. In addition, despite considerable effort training archerfish using several tests and training methods, there is still no evidence that fish can learn an Abstract Concept-based test.

  • same different Abstract Concept learning by archerfish toxotes chatareus
    PLOS ONE, 2015
    Co-Authors: Cait Newport, Guy Wallis, Ulrike E. Siebeck
    Abstract:

    While several phylogenetically diverse species have proved capable of learning Abstract Concepts, previous attempts to teach fish have been unsuccessful. In this report, the ability of archerfish (Toxotes chatareus) to learn the Concepts of sameness and difference using a simultaneous two-item discrimination task was tested. Six archerfish were trained to either select a pair of same or different stimuli which were presented simultaneously. Training consisted of a 2-phase approach. Training phase 1: the symbols in the same and different pair did not change, thereby allowing the fish to solve the test through direct association. The fish were trained consecutively with four different sets of stimuli to familiarize them with the general procedure before moving on to the next training phase. Training phase 2: six different symbols were used to form the same or different pairs. After acquisition, same/different Concept learning was tested by presenting fish with six novel stimuli (transfer test). Five fish successfully completed the first training phase. Only one individual passed the second training phase, however, transfer performance was consistent with chance. This individual was given further training using 60 training exemplars but the individual was unable to reach the training criterion. We hypothesize that archerfish are able to solve a limited version of the same/different test by learning the response to each possible stimulus configuration or by developing a series of relatively simple choice contingencies. We conclude that the simultaneous two-item discrimination task we describe cannot be successfully used to test the Concepts of same and different in archerfish. In addition, despite considerable effort training archerfish using several tests and training methods, there is still no evidence that fish can learn an Abstract Concept-based test.

E. J. Capaldi – One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • The sequential view: From rapidly fading stimulus traces to the organization of memory and the Abstract Concept of number
    Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1994
    Co-Authors: E. J. Capaldi
    Abstract:

    The development of the sequential approach to instrumental learning from about 1958 to the present is described. The sequential model began as an attempt to explain a particular class of neglected partial reward phenomena, those in which performance in acquisition and extinction is influenced by the particular sequence in which rewarded and nonrewarded trials occur in acquisition, and it was subsequently applied to a variety of other phenomena. Over time, the sequential model grew, sometimes through the replacement of older assumptions by novel ones, as when retrieved memories replaced stimulus traces, and sometimes simply through the addition of novel assumptions, such as that animals are capable of remembering retrospectively one, two, three or more prior nonrewarded outcomes—the N-length assumption. The most recent assumption added to the sequential model is that on a given trial the animal may utilize its memory of prior reward outcomes to anticipate both the current reward outcome and one or more subsequent reward outcomes. One way to view the sequential model is to say that it is a specific theory in various degrees of competition with other specific theories. Several examples of this are provided. Another way to view the sequential model, a more important way in my opinion, is to see it as a representative of a general theoretical approach, intertrial theory, which differs in fundamental respects from another much more generally utilized theoretical approach, intra-trial theory. I suggest that there is a substantial body of data that can be explained by inter-trial mechanisms but not by intratrial mechanisms. The future may well reveal that the inter-trial mechanisms have greater explanatory potential than the currently more popular intratrial mechanisms.

  • the sequential view from rapidly fading stimulus traces to the organization of memory and the Abstract Concept of number
    Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1994
    Co-Authors: E. J. Capaldi
    Abstract:

    The development ofthe sequential approach to instrumentallearning from about 1958 to the present is described. The sequential model began as an attempt to explain a particular dass of neglected partial reward phenomena, those in wh ich performance in acquisition and extinction is influenced by the particular sequence in which rewarded and nonrewarded trials occur in ac­ quisition, and it was subsequently applied to a variety of other phenomena. Over time, the se­ quential model grew, sometimes through the replacement of older assumptions by novel ones, as when retrieved memories replaced stimulus traces, and sometimes simply through the addi­ tion of novel assumptions, such as that animals are capable of remembering retrospectively one, two, three or more prior nonrewarded outcomes–the N-Iength assumption. The most recent assumption added to the sequential model is that on a given trial the animal may utilize its memory of prior reward outcomes to anticipate both the current reward outcome and one or more sub­ sequent reward outcomes. One way to view the sequential model is to say that it is a specific theory in various degrees of competition with other specific theories. Several examples of this are provided. Another way to view the sequential model, a more important way in my opinion, is to see it as a representative of a general theoretical approach, intertrial theory, which differs in fundamental respects from another much more generaIly utilized theoretical approach, intra­ trial theory. I suggest that there is a substantial body of data that can be explained by inter­ trial mechanisms but not by intratrial mechanisms. The future may weIl reveal that the inter­ trial mechanisms have greater explanatory potential than the currently more popular intratrial mechanisms. The cognitive abilities of rats are far greater and more varied than was dreamed of even remotely until recently. Even now they are familiar to only a relative few. As Wright (1992) has recently indicated, an animal may per­ form poorly not because of its cognitive limitations, but because the experimenter has employed a task ill suited to the particular species. Varied reward situations, em­ phasized in this paper, have demonstrated themselves to be ideally suited to revealing a variety of complex abili­ ties in rats. To be sure, varied reward situations were em­ ployed initiaIly to test the simplest of hypotheses. But varied reward situations, as we shall see, are very flexi­ ble, and when appropriately modified they can be ern­ ployed in the service of many ends. Within the context ofthe author’s sequential hypothesis, varied reward tasks have been repeatedly modified to reveal increasingly com­ plex processes in the rat, an activity that is ongoing. In the present paper, varied reward refers to situations with the following characteristics. Animals receive two or more different reward outcomes, such as food reward

Ulrike E. Siebeck – One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Same/Different Abstract Concept Learning by Archerfish (Toxotes chatareus).
    PloS one, 2015
    Co-Authors: Cait Newport, Guy Wallis, Ulrike E. Siebeck
    Abstract:

    While several phylogenetically diverse species have proved capable of learning Abstract Concepts, previous attempts to teach fish have been unsuccessful. In this report, the ability of archerfish (Toxotes chatareus) to learn the Concepts of sameness and difference using a simultaneous two-item discrimination task was tested. Six archerfish were trained to either select a pair of same or different stimuli which were presented simultaneously. Training consisted of a 2-phase approach. Training phase 1: the symbols in the same and different pair did not change, thereby allowing the fish to solve the test through direct association. The fish were trained consecutively with four different sets of stimuli to familiarize them with the general procedure before moving on to the next training phase. Training phase 2: six different symbols were used to form the same or different pairs. After acquisition, same/different Concept learning was tested by presenting fish with six novel stimuli (transfer test). Five fish successfully completed the first training phase. Only one individual passed the second training phase, however, transfer performance was consistent with chance. This individual was given further training using 60 training exemplars but the individual was unable to reach the training criterion. We hypothesize that archerfish are able to solve a limited version of the same/different test by learning the response to each possible stimulus configuration or by developing a series of relatively simple choice contingencies. We conclude that the simultaneous two-item discrimination task we describe cannot be successfully used to test the Concepts of same and different in archerfish. In addition, despite considerable effort training archerfish using several tests and training methods, there is still no evidence that fish can learn an Abstract Concept-based test.

  • same different Abstract Concept learning by archerfish toxotes chatareus
    PLOS ONE, 2015
    Co-Authors: Cait Newport, Guy Wallis, Ulrike E. Siebeck
    Abstract:

    While several phylogenetically diverse species have proved capable of learning Abstract Concepts, previous attempts to teach fish have been unsuccessful. In this report, the ability of archerfish (Toxotes chatareus) to learn the Concepts of sameness and difference using a simultaneous two-item discrimination task was tested. Six archerfish were trained to either select a pair of same or different stimuli which were presented simultaneously. Training consisted of a 2-phase approach. Training phase 1: the symbols in the same and different pair did not change, thereby allowing the fish to solve the test through direct association. The fish were trained consecutively with four different sets of stimuli to familiarize them with the general procedure before moving on to the next training phase. Training phase 2: six different symbols were used to form the same or different pairs. After acquisition, same/different Concept learning was tested by presenting fish with six novel stimuli (transfer test). Five fish successfully completed the first training phase. Only one individual passed the second training phase, however, transfer performance was consistent with chance. This individual was given further training using 60 training exemplars but the individual was unable to reach the training criterion. We hypothesize that archerfish are able to solve a limited version of the same/different test by learning the response to each possible stimulus configuration or by developing a series of relatively simple choice contingencies. We conclude that the simultaneous two-item discrimination task we describe cannot be successfully used to test the Concepts of same and different in archerfish. In addition, despite considerable effort training archerfish using several tests and training methods, there is still no evidence that fish can learn an Abstract Concept-based test.