Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Communication Through a Window of Error: Proportional Processing and Signal Categorization

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Psychological Mechanisms in Animal Communication

Part of the book series: Animal Signals and Communication ((ANISIGCOM,volume 5))

Abstract

Animals can perceive information about the physical and social environment around them only through their sensory systems. Because of this, the constraints of sensory mechanisms can impact animals’ abilities to accurately assess their environment. In communication systems, receivers depend on perceiving signals to make decisions about how to respond. One feature of sensory systems that can blur their perceptual interpretation of stimuli is an imperfect ability to compare magnitudes. This complicates communication tasks such as signal categorization. For many sensory parameters, this difficulty is exacerbated for high-magnitude stimuli. Often, the potential error in perceiving stimulus magnitude varies predictably according to magnitude. This allows us to predict how receiver error can influence the evolution of communication systems, including signal characteristics, signaler strategies , and receiver behaviors. Perceptual error can contribute to the evolution of exaggerated signals, novel signal components, loss of signal components, and directional changes according to signal function. For signalers, perceptual error by receivers can lead to changes in rate of display, choice of dynamic signal components, and escalation of competitions. For receivers, this process sheds light on the evolution of sensory systems, allocation of attention , and compensatory behaviors. We invite researchers to apply these concepts in diverse areas of animal communication study.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Akre KL, Johnsen S (2014) Psychophysics and the evolution of behavior. Trends Ecol Evol 29:291–300

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Akre KL, Ryan MJ (2010) Proximity-dependent response to variably complex mating signals in túngara frogs (Physalaemus pustulosus). Ethology 116(12):1138–1145

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akre KL, Ryan MJ (2011) Female túngara frogs elicit more complex mating signals from males. Behav Ecol 22:846–853

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akre KL, Farris HE, Lea AM, Page RA, Ryan MJ (2011) Signal perception in frogs and bats and the evolution of mating signals. Science 333:751–752

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Andersson M (1994) Sexual selection. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Andersson M, Simmons LW (2006) Sexual selection and mate choice. Trends Ecol Evol 21:296–302

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bateson M, Kacelnik A (1995) Preferences for fixed and variable food sources: variability in amount and delay. J Exp Anal Behav 63:313–329

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Beckers OM, Schul J (2004) Phonotaxis in Hyla versicolor (Anura, Hylidae): the effect of absolute call amplitude. J Comp Phys A 190(11):869–876

    Google Scholar 

  • Bee MA (2008) Parallel female preferences for call duration in a diploid ancestor of an allotetraploid treefrog. Anim Behav 76:845–853

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Bee MA, Gerhardt HC (2002) Individual voice recognition in a territorial frog (Rana catesbeiana). Proc R Soc Lond B 269(1499):1443–1448

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bee MA, Vélez A, Forester JD (2012) Sound level discrimination by gray treefrogs in the presence and absence of chorus-shaped noise. J Acoust Soc Am 131(5):4188–4195

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Beecher MD, Petersen MR, Zoloth SR, Moody DB, Stebbins WC (1979) Perception of conspecific vocalizations by Japanese macaques. Brain Behav Evol 16(5–6):443–460

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bernal XE, Page RA, Rand AS, Ryan MJ (2007) Natural history miscellany: cues for eavesdroppers: do frog calls indicate prey density and quality? Am Nat 169:409–415

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bernal XE, Akre KL, Baugh AT, Rand AS, Ryan MJ (2009) Female and male behavioral response to advertisement calls of graded complexity in túngara frogs, Physalaemus pustulosus. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 63:1269–1279

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bullock TH, Hopkins CD, Fay RR (eds) (2006) Electroreception, vol 21. Springer Science & Business Media, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  • Bush SL, Gerhardt HC, Schul J (2002) Pattern recognition and call preferences in treefrogs (Anura: Hylidae): a quantitative analysis using a no-choice paradigm. Anim Behav 63:7–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caldwell MS, McDaniel JG, Warkentin KM (2009) Frequency information in the vibration-cued escape hatching of red-eyed treefrogs. J Exp Biol 212(4):566–575

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Charrier I, Mathevon N, Jouventin P (2002) How does a fur seal mother recognize the voice of her pup? An experimental study of Arctocephalus tropicalis. J Exp Biol 205(5):603–612

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen JA (1984) Sexual selection and the psychophysics of female choice. Z Tierpsychol 64:1–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colombelli-Négrel D, Hauber ME, Robertson J, Sulloway FJ, Hoi H, Griggio M, Kleindorfer S (2012) Embryonic learning of vocal passwords in superb fairy-wrens reveals intruder cuckoo nestlings. Curr Biol 22:2155–2160

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cronin TW, Johnsen S, Marshall NJ, Warrant EJ (2014) Visual ecology. Princeton UniversityPress, Princeton, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Endler JA, Westcott DA, Madden JR, Robson T (2005) Animal visual systems and the evolution of color patterns: sensory processing illuminates signal evolution. Evolution 59:1795–1818

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fechner GT (1860) Elemente der Psychophysik (2 vols). English edition: Fechner GT (1966) Elements of psychophysics, vol 1 (trans: Adler HE). Breitkopf and Hartel

    Google Scholar 

  • Forrest TG (1994) From sender to receiver: propagation and environmnetal effects on acoustic signals. Am Zool 34:644–654

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gabor CR, Ryan MJ (2001) Geographical variation in reproductive character displacement in mate choice by male sailfin mollies. Proc R Soc Lond B 268:1063–1070

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gerhardt HC (1981) Mating call recognition in the green treefrog (Hyla cinerea): importance of two frequency bands as a function of sound pressure level. J Comp Physiol 144(1):9–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gerhardt HC (1987) Evolutionary and neurobiological implications of selective phonotaxis in the green treefrog, Hyla cinerea. Anim Behav 35(5):1479–1489

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gerhardt HC (1994) Reproductive character displacement of female mate choice in the grey treefrog, Hyla chrysoscelis. Anim Behav 47:959–969

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gerhardt HC, Watson GF (1995) Within-male variability in call properties and female preference in the grey treefrog. Anim Behav 50:1187–1191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gerhardt HC, Tanner SD, Corrigan CM, Walton HC (2000) Female preference functions based on call duration in the gray tree frog (Hyla versicolor). Behav Ecol 11(6):663–669

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goutte S, Kime NM, Argo TF, Ryan MJ (2010) Calling strategies of male túngara frogs in response to dynamic playback. Behaviour 147:65–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Green DM, Swets JA (1966) Signal detection theory and psychophysics. WiIey, New York, NY, London, Sydney

    Google Scholar 

  • Guilford T, Dawkins MS (1991) Receiver psychology and the evolution of animal signals. Anim Behav 42:1–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howard DJ (1993) Reinforcement: origin, dynamics, and fate of an evolutionary hypothesis. In: Harrison RG (ed) Hybrid zones and the evolutionary process. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 46–69

    Google Scholar 

  • Hu Y, Cardoso GC (2010) Which birds adjust the frequency of vocalizations in urban noise? Anim Behav 79(4):863–867

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jennions MD, Petrie M (1997) Variation in mate choice and mating preferences: a review of causes and consequences. Biol Rev 72:283–327

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Langmore NE, Hunt S, Kilner RM (2003) Escalation of a coevolutionary arms race through host rejection of brood parasitic young. Nature 422(6928):157–160

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lemmon EM (2009) Diversification of conspecific signals in sympatry: geographic overlap drives multidimensional reproductive character displacement in frogs. Evolution 63(5):1155–1170

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lindstrom J, Pike TW, Blount JD, Metcalfe NB (2009) Optimization of resource allocation can explain the temporal dynamics and honesty of sexual signals. Am Nat 174:515–525

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Loftus-Hills JJ, Littlejohn MJ (1992) Reinforcement and reproductive character displacement in Gastrophryne carolinensis and G. olivacea (Anura: Microhylidae): a reexamination. Evolution 46:896–906

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mendelson TC, Shaw KL (2006) Close-range acoustic signaling and mate choice in Hawaiian crickets (Gryllidae: Laupala). Behav Ecol Soc 59(6):770–776

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller CT, Bee MA (2012) Receiver psychology turns 20: is it time for a broader approach? Anim Behav 83:331–343

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Morris MR (1998) Further examination of female preference for vertical bars in swordtails: preference for ‘no bars’ in a species without bars. J Fish Biol 53:56–63

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson DA, Marler P (1990) The perception of birdsong and an ecological concept of signal space. In: Stebbins WC, Berkley MA (eds) Comparative perception, vol 2: complex signals, Wiley series in neuroscience. Wiley, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Page RA, Ryan MJ (2008) The effect of signal complexity on localization performance in bats that localize frog calls. Anim Behav 76:761–769

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pampoulie C, Lindström K, St Mary CM (2004) Have your cake and eat it too: male sand gobies show more parental care in the presence of female partners. Behav Ecol 15:199–204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reboreda JC, Kacelnik A (1991) Risk sensitivity in starlings: variability in food amount and food delay. Behav Ecol 2:301–308

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reichert MS (2013) Visual cues elicit courtship signals in a nocturnal anuran. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 67(2):265–271

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reichert MS, Gerhardt HC (2012) Trade-offs and upper limits to signal performance during close-range vocal competition in gray tree frogs Hyla versicolor. Am Nat 180(4):425–437

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Reichert MS, Gerhardt HC (2013) Gray tree frogs, Hyla versicolor, give lower frequency aggressive calls in more escalated contests. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 67:795–804

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riley JR, Greggers U, Smith AD, Reynolds DR, Menzel R (2005) The flight paths of honeybees recruited by the waggle dance. Nature 435:205–207

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenthal GG, Wagner WE, Ryan MJ (2002) Secondary reduction of preference for the sword ornament in the pygmy swordtail Xiphophorus nigrensis (Pisces: Poeciliidae). Anim Behav 63:37–45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rowe C (1999) Receiver psychology and the evolution of multicomponent signals. Anim Behav 58:921–931

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rowe C (2013) Receiver psychology: a receiver’s perspective. Anim Behav 85:517–523

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan MJ (1985) The túngara frog, a study in sexual selection and communication. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryan MJ (1998) Sexual selection, receiver biases, and the evolution of sex differences. Science 281:1999–2003

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan MJ, Rand AS (1993) Species recognition and sexual selection as a unitary problem in animal communication. Evolution:647–657

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz JJ, Buchanan BW, Gerhardt HC (2001) Female mate choice in the gray treefrog (Hyla versicolor) in three experimental environments. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 49(6):443–455

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz JJ, Huth K, Hutchin T (2004) How long do females really listen? Assessment time for female mate choice in the grey treefrog, Hyla versicolor. Anim Behav 68(3):533–540

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Servedio MR, Noor MAF (2003) The role of reinforcement in speciation: theory and data. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 34:339–364

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tautz J, Sandeman DC (2003) Recruitment of honeybees to non-scented food sources. J Comp Phys A 189:293–300

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • von Frisch K (1967) The dance language and orientation of bees. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • von Thienen W, Metzler D, Choe DH, Witte V (2014) Pheromone communication in ants: a detailed analysis of concentration-dependent decisions in three species. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 68:1611–1627

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waage JK (1975) Reproductive isolation and the potential for character displacement in the damselflies Calopteryx maculata and C. aequabilis (Odonata: Calopterygidae). Syst Zool 24:24–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber EH (1834) De Pulsu, resorptione, auditu et tactu: annotationes anatomicae et physiologicae. Koehlor, Lerpzig

    Google Scholar 

  • Welch AM, Semlitsch RD, Gerhardt HC (1998) Call duration as an indicator of genetic quality in male gray tree frogs. Science 280:1928–1930

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wells KD, Taigen TL (1986) The effect of social interactions on calling energetics in the gray treefrog (Hyla versicolor). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 19:9–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiens JJ (2001) Widespread loss of sexually selected traits: how the peacock lost its spots. Trends Ecol Evol 16:517–523

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiley RH (2006) Signal detection and animal communication. Adv Stud Behav 36:217–247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiley RH (2013) Signal detection, noise, and the evolution of communication. Animal communication and noise. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 7–30

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiley RH, Richards DG (1978) Physical constraints on acoustic communication in the atmosphere: implications for the evolution of animal vocalizations. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 3(1):69–94

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wong BM, Candolin U (2005) How is female mate choice affected by male competition? Biol Rev 80:559–571

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wyttenbach RA, Farris HE (2004) Psychophysics in insect hearing. Microsc Res Tech 63(6):375–387

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Yost WH (1994) Fundamentals of hearing: an introduction. Academic Press, San Diego, CA

    Google Scholar 

  • Zuk M, Kolluru GR (1998) Exploitation of sexual signals by predators and parasitoids. Q Rev Biol 73:415–438

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zylinksi S, Johnsen S (2011) Mesopelagic cephalopods switch between transparency and pigmentation to optimize camouflage in the deep. Curr Biol 21:1937–1941

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank Mark Bee, Cory Miller, and an anonymous reviewer for their helpful comments on the manuscript. We thank Melissa Bateson, Alex Kacelnik, and John Wiens for the use of their excellent figures.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Psychology Department, Hunter College, New York, NY, 10065, USA

    Karin L. Akre

  2. Biology Department, Duke University, Durham, NC, 27708, USA

    Sönke Johnsen

Authors
  1. Karin L. Akre
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sönke Johnsen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Karin L. Akre .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Behavior, University of Minnesota - Twin Cities, Saint Paul, Minnesota, USA

    Mark A. Bee

  2. Department of Psychology, Neurosciences Graduate Program, University of California, La Jolla, California, USA

    Cory T. Miller

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Akre, K.L., Johnsen, S. (2016). Communication Through a Window of Error: Proportional Processing and Signal Categorization. In: Bee, M., Miller, C. (eds) Psychological Mechanisms in Animal Communication. Animal Signals and Communication, vol 5. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-48690-1_6

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation