The Psychological Record

, Volume 65, Issue 2, pp 289–300 | Cite as

Acquisition and Limited Transfer of Numerical Discrimination of Object Stimuli in Rats

Original Article


A series of experiments explored rats’ ability to learn abstract ordinal positions of object stimuli in order to investigate their numerical competence. Three of four Long-Evans rats, trained to respond to the third of six objects in a line, reliably learned this task in three different trials with three different stimulus objects. As the objects’ spatial location was changed trial-by-trial, the spatial position of stimuli could not serve as an effective discriminative cue. In the first transfer test, trials with three novel objects were used as probe tests to the original training. In the second test, rats were trained with all six objects, and then given three novel test stimuli. During the transfer test period, rats maintained good performance with training stimuli, whereas most responses to probe tests were at chance level, showing limited transfer of counting behavior to novel stimuli. Results are discussed in terms of stimulus-specific learning and domain-restricted concept learning.


Rats Counting Numerical competence Stimulus-specific learning Domain-restricted learning 


  1. Beran, M. J., & Rumbaugh, D. M. (2001). “Constructive” enumeration by chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) on a computerized task. Animal Cognition, 4, 81–89. doi: 10.1007/s100710100098.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Boysen, S. T., & Berntson, G. G. (1989). Numerical competence in a chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 103, 23–31.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Brannon, E. M., & Roitman, J. D. (2003). Nonverbal representations of time and number in animals and human infants. In W. H. Meck (Ed.), Functional and Neural Mechanisms of Interval Timing. Methods and New Frontiers in Neuroscience, pp. 143–182. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. doi: 10.1201/9780203009574.Google Scholar
  4. Brannon, E. M., & Terrace, H. S. (1998). Ordering of the numerosities 1 to 9 by monkeys. Science, 282, 746–749.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Brannon, E. M., & Terrace, H. S. (2000). Representation of the numerosities 1–9 by rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 26, 31–49.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Breukelaar, J. W. C., & Dalrymple-Alford, J. C. (1998). Timing ability and numerical competence in rats. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 24, 84–97.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Burns, R. A., Goettl, M. E., & Burt, S. T. (1995). Numerical discrimination with arrhythmic serial presentations. The Psychological Record, 45, 95–104.Google Scholar
  8. Capaldi, E. J., & Miller, D. J. (1988). Counting in rats: Its functional significance and the independent cognitive processes that constitute it. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 14, 3–17.Google Scholar
  9. Castro, L., Lazareva, O. F., Vecera, S. P., & Wasserman, E. A. (2010). Changes in area affect figure–ground assignment in pigeons. Vision Research, 50, 497–508. doi: 10.1016/j.visres.2009.12.016.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. D’Amato, M. R., Salmon, D. P., & Colombo, M. (1985). Extent and limits of the matching concept in monkeys (Cebus apella). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 11, 35–51.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Davis, H., & Albert, M. (1986). Numerical discrimination by rats using sequential auditory stimuli. Animal Learning & Behavior, 14, 57–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Davis, H., & Albert, M. (1987). Failure to transfer or train a numerical discrimination using sequential visual stimuli in rats. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 25, 472–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Davis, H., & Bradford, S. A. (1986). Counting behavior by rats in a simulated natural environment. Ethology, 73, 265–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Davis, H., MacKenzie, K. A., & Morrison, S. (1989). Numerical discrimination by rats (Rattus norvegicus) using body and vibrissal touch. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 103, 45–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Davis, H., & Memmott, J. (1983). Autocontingencies: Rats count to three to predict safety from shock. Animal Learning & Behavior, 11, 95–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Elmore, L. C., Wright, A. A., Rivera, J., & Katz, J. S. (2009). Individual differences: Either relational learning or item-specific learning in a same/different task. Learning & Behavior, 37, 204–213. doi: 10.3758/LB.37.2.204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gelman, R., & Gallistel, C. R. (1978). The Child’s Understanding of Number. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Katz, J. S., & Wright, A. A. (2006). Same/different abstract-concept learning by pigeons. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 32, 80–86. doi: 10.1037/0097-7403.32.1.80.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Matsuzawa, T. (1985). Use of numbers by a chimpanzee. Nature, 315, 57–59.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Oden, D. L., Thompson, R. K. R., & Premack, D. (1988). Spontaneous transfer of matching by infant chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 14, 140–145.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Pepperberg, I. M. (1994). Evidence for numerical competence in an African Grey parrot (Psittacus erithacus). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 108, 36–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Pepperberg, I. M. (2012). Further evidence for addition and numerical competence by a Grey parrot (Psittacus erithacus). Animal Cognition, 15, 711–717. doi: 10.1007/s10071-012-0476-5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Rugani, R., Fontanari, L., Simoni, E., Regolin, L., & Vallortigara, G. (2009). Arithmetic in newborn chicks. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 276, 2451–2460. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2009.0044.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Rugani, R., Kelly, D. M., Szelest, I., Regolin, L., & Vallortigara, G. (2010). Is it only humans that count from left to right? Biology Letters, 6, 290–292. doi: 10.1098/rsbl.2009.0960.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Rugani, R., Regolin, L., & Vallortigara, G. (2007). Rudimental numerical competence in 5-day-old domestic chicks (Gallus gallus): Identification of ordinal position. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 33, 21–31. doi: 10.1037/0097-7403.33.1.21.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Rugani, R., Vallortigara, G., Vallini, B., & Regolin, L. (2011). Asymmetrical number-space mapping in the avian brain. Neurobiology of Learning and Memory, 95, 231–238. doi: 10.1016/j.nlm.2010.11.012.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Spelke, E. S. (2011). Natural number and natural geometry. In E. Brannon & S. Dehaene (Eds.), Space, Time and Number in the Brain: Searching for the Foundations of Mathematical Thought, Attention and Performance 24 (pp. 287–317). Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-385948-8.00018-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Suzuki, K., & Kobayashi, T. (2000). Numerical competence in rats (Rattus norvegicus): Davis and Bradford (1986) extended. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 114, 73–85.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Wilson, B., Mackintosh, N. J., & Boakes, R. A. (1985). Matching and oddity learning in the pigeon: Transfer effects and the absence of relational learning. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 37B, 295–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Wright, A. A., & Katz, J. S. (2006). Mechanisms of same/different concept learning in primates and avians. Behavioural Processes, 72, 234–254. doi: 10.1016/j.beproc.2006.03.009.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Wright, A. A., & Katz, J. S. (2009). A case for restricted-domain relational learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16, 907–913. doi: 10.3758/PBR.16.5.907.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Wright, A. A., & Lickteig, M. T. (2010). What is learned when concept learning fails? – A theory of restricted-domain relational learning. Learning and Motivation, 41, 273–286. doi: 10.1016/j.lmot.2010.08.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Xia, L., Emmerton, J., Siemann, M., & Delius, J. D. (2001). Pigeons (Columba livia) learn to link numerosities with symbols. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 115, 83–91. doi: 10.1037/0735-7036.115.1.83.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Xia, L., Siemann, M., & Delius, J. D. (2000). Matching of numerical symbols with number of responses by pigeons. Animal Cognition, 3, 35–43. doi: 10.1007/s100710050048.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Association for Behavior Analysis International 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Graduate School of Socio-Environmental StudiesKanazawa UniversityKakuma, KanazawaJapan

Personalised recommendations