Animal Learning & Behavior

, Volume 30, Issue 3, pp 275–281 | Cite as

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

  • Chana K. Akins
  • Emily D. Klein
  • Thomas R. ZentallEmail author


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.


Social Learning Japanese Quail Social Facilitation Imitative Learning Stimulus Enhancement 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Akins, C. K., &Zentall, T. R. (1996). Imitative learning in male Japanese quail (Coturnix japonica) involving the two-action method.Journal of Comparative Psychology,110, 316–320.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Akins, C. K., &Zentall, T. R. (1998). Imitation in Japanese quail: The role of reinforcement of demonstrator responding.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,5, 694–697.Google Scholar
  3. Boysen, S. T., &Himes, G. T. (1999). Current issues and emerging theories in animal cognition.Annual Review of Psychology,50, 683–705.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Campbell, F. M., Heyes, C. M., &Goldsmith, A. R. (1999). Stimulus learning and response learning in the European starling, in a two-object/two-action test.Animal Behaviour,58, 151–158.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Custance, D. M., Whiten, A., &Fredman, T. (1999). Social learning of artificial fruit processing in enculturated capuchin monkeys.Journal of Comparative Psychology,113, 13–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dawson, B. V., &Foss, B. M. (1965). Observational learning in budgerigars.Animal Behaviour,13, 470–474.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Denny, M. R., Clos, C. F., &Bell, R. C. (1988). Learning in the rat of a choice response by observation of S-S contingencies. In T. R. Zentall & B. G. Galef, Jr. (Eds.),Social learning: Psychological and biological perspectives (pp. 207–223). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  8. Dorrance, B. R., &Zentall, T. R. (2001). Imitative learning in Japanese quail depends on the motivational state of the observer at the time of observation.Journal of Comparative Psychology,115, 62–67.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Fitzgerald, T. C. (1969).The Coturnix quail: Anatomy and histology. Ames: Iowa State University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Galef, B. J., Jr. (1988). Imitation in animals: History, definition, and interpretation of data from the psychological laboratory. In T. R. Zentall & B. G. Galef, Jr. (Eds.),Social learning: Psychological and biological perspectives (pp. 3–28). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  11. Galef, B. J., Jr. (1998). Recent progress in studies of imitation and social learning in animals. In M. Sabourin, F. I. M. Craik, & M. Robert (Eds.),Advances in psychological science: II. Biological and cognitive aspects (pp. 275–299). Hove, U.K.: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  12. Galef, B. J., Jr.,Manzig, L. A., &Field, R. M. (1986). Imitation learning in budgerigars: Dawson and Foss (1965) revisited.Behavioral Processes,13, 191–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Grindley, G. C. (1932). The formation of a simple habit in guinea-pigs.British Journal of Psychology,23, 127–147.Google Scholar
  14. Heyes, C. M. (1996). Genuine imitation? In C. M. Heyes & B. G. Galef, Jr. (Eds.),Social learning in animals: The roots of culture (pp. 371–389). San Diego: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Heyes, C. M., &Dawson, G. R. (1990). A demonstration of observational learning in rats using a bidirectional control.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,42B, 59–71.Google Scholar
  16. Heyes, C. M., Dawson, G. R., &Nokes, T. (1992). Imitation in rats: Initial responding and transfer evidence.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,45B, 59–71.Google Scholar
  17. Heyes, C. M., &Galef, B. G., Jr. (Eds.) (1996).Social learning in animals: The roots of culture. San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  18. Kaiser, D. H., Zentall, T. R., &Galef, B. G., Jr. (1997). Can imitation in pigeons be explained by local enhancement together with trial and error learning?Psychological Science,8, 459–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Mitchell, C. J., Heyes, C. M., Gardner, M. R., &Dawson, G. R. (1999). Limitations of a bidirectional control procedure for the investigation of imitation in rats: Odour cues on the manipulandum.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,52B, 193–202.Google Scholar
  20. Powell, R. W., &Kelly, W. (1975). A method for the objective study of tool-using behavior.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,24, 249–253.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Sachs, B. D. (1966). Sexual aggressive interactions among pairs of quail (Coturnix coturnix japonica).American Zoologist,6, 559.Google Scholar
  22. Thorndike, E. L. (1898). Animal intelligence: An experimental study of the associative processes in animals.Psychological Review Monograph Supplements,2(4), 1–109.Google Scholar
  23. Tomasello, M. (1996). Do Apes ape? In C.M. Heyes & B.G. Galef, Jr. (Eds.),Social learning in animals: The roots of culture (pp. 319–346). San Diego: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Zentall, T. R., &Galef, B. G., Jr. (Eds.) (1988).Social learning: Psychological and biological perspectives. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  25. Zentall, T. R., &Levine, J. M. (1972). Observational learning and social facilitation in the rat.Science,178, 1220–1221.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Zentall, T. R., Sutton, J. E., &Sherburne, L. M. (1996). True imitative learning in pigeons.Psychological Science,7, 343–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chana K. Akins
    • 1
  • Emily D. Klein
    • 1
  • Thomas R. Zentall
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of KentuckyLexington

Personalised recommendations