Abstract
The effects of identical context on pattern recognition by pigeons for outline drawings of faces were investigated by training pigeons to identify (Experiment 1) and categorize (Experiment 2) these stimuli according to the orientation of the mouth—an upright U shape representing a smiling mouth or an inverted U shape representing a sad mouth. These target stimuli were presented alone (Pair 1), with three dots in a triangular orientation to represent a nose and eyes (Pair 2), and with the face pattern surrounded by an oval (Pair 3). In Experiment 1, the pigeons trained with Pair 1 were most accurate, those trained with Pair 2 were less so, and those trained with Pair 3 failed to acquire the discrimination within eighty 100-trial sessions. The same ordering was found in Experiment 2 for pigeons trained on the three pairs simultaneously. The authors suggest that a contrasting finding in humans, the face superiority effect, might be due to a gain in discriminability resulting from recognition of the pattern as a face. An exemplar model of information processing that excludes linguistic coding accounts for the present results.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Bloch, S., &Martinoya, C. (1982). Comparing frontal and lateral viewing in the pigeon: I. Tachistoscopic visual acuity as a function of distance.Behavioural Brain Research,5, 231–244.
Blough, D. S., &Blough, P. M. (1997). Form perception and attention in pigeons.Animal Learning & Behavior,25, 1–20.
Chase, S. (1983). Pigeons and the magical number seven. In M. L. Commons, R. J. Herrnstein, & A. R. Wagner (Eds.),Quantitative analyses of behavior: Vol. 4. Discrimination processes (pp. 37–57). Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
Chase, S., &Heinemann, E. G. (1991). Memory limitations in human and animal signal detection. In M. L. Commons, J. A. Nevin, & M. C. Davison (Eds.),Signal detection: Mechanisms, models, and applications. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Chase, S., &Heinemann, E. G. (2001). Exemplar memory and discrimination. In R. G. Cook (Ed.),Avian visual cognition. Retrieved April 20, 2005 from www.pigeon.psy.tufts.edu/avc/chase/.
Cook, R. G., Cavoto, K. K., &Cavoto, B. R. (1996). Mechanism of multidimensional grouping, fusion, and search in avian texture discrimination.Animal Learning & Behavior,24, 150–167.
Davidoff, J. (1986). The mental representation of faces: Spatial and temporal factors.Perception & Psychophysics,40, 391–400.
Donis, F. J. (1999). The oblique effect in pigeons (Columba livia).Journal of Comparative Psychology,113, 107–115.
Donis, F. J., &Heinemann, E. G. (1993). The object-line inferiority effect in pigeons.Perception & Psychophysics,53, 117–122.
Donis, F. J., Heinemann, E. G., &Chase, S. (1994). Context effects in visual pattern recognition by pigeons.Perception & Psychophysics,55, 676–688.
Enns, J. T., &Prinzmetal, W. (1984). The role of redundancy in the object-line effect.Perception & Psychophysics,35, 22–32.
Epstein, W. (1967).Varieties of perceptual learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Estes, W. (1994).Classification and cognition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Farah, M. J., Tanaka, J. W., &Drain, H. M. (1995). What causes the face inversion effect?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,21, 628–634.
Freeman, M. F., &Tukey, J. W. (1950). Transformations related to the angular and the square root.Annals of Mathematical Statistics,21, 607–611.
Goodale, M. A. (1983). Visually guided pecking in the pigeon (Columba livia).Brain, Behavior, & Evolution,22, 22–41.
Heinemann, E. G. (1983a). A memory model for decision processes in pigeons. In M. L. Commons, R. J. Herrnstein, & A. R. Wagner (Eds.),Quantitative analyses of behavior: Vol. 4. Discrimination processes (pp. 3–19). Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
Heinemann, E. G. (1983b). The presolution period and the detection of statistical associations. In M. L. Commons, R. J. Herrnstein, & A. R. Wagner (Eds.),Quantitative analyses of behavior: Vol. 4. Discrimination processes (pp. 21–35). Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
Heinemann, E. G. (1984). A model for temporal discrimination and generalization. In J. Gibbon & L. Allan (Eds.),Timing and time perception (Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, Vol. 423, pp. 361–371). New York: New York Academy of Sciences.
Heinemann, E. G., &Chase, S. (1990). A quantitative model for pattern recognition. In M. L. Commons, R. J. Herrnstein, S. M. Kosslyn, & D. B. Mumford (Eds.),Quantitative analyses of behavior: Vol. 9. Computational and clinical approaches to pattern recognition and concept formation (pp. 109–126). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Herrnstein, R. J., &Loveland, D. H. (1964). Complex visual concept in the pigeon.Science,146, 549–551.
Hollard, V. D., &Delius, J. D. (1982). Rotational invariance in visual pattern recognition by pigeons and humans.Science,218, 804–806.
Homa, D., Haver, B., &Schwartz, T. (1976). Perceptibility of schematic face stimuli: Evidence for a perceptual gestalt.Memory & Cognition,4, 176–185.
Huber, L. (2001). Visual categorization in pigeons. In R. G. Cook (Ed.),Avian visual cognition. Retrieved April 20, 2005 from www.pigeon. psy.tufts.edu/avc/huber/.
Jitsumori, M., &Yoshihara, M. (1997). Categorical discrimination of human facial expressions by pigeons: A test of the linear feature model.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,50B, 253–268.
Kelly, D. M., &Cook, R. G. (2003). Differential effects of visual context on pattern discrimination by pigeons (Columba livia) and humans (Homo sapiens).Journal of Comparative Psychology,117, 200–208.
Kirkpatrick-Steger, K., Wasserman, E. A., &Biederman, I. (1996). Effects of spatial rearrangement of object components on picture recognition in pigeons.Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,65, 465–475.
Kirkpatrick-Steger, K., Wasserman, E. A., &Biederman, I. (1998). Effects of geon deletion, scrambling, and movement on picture recognition in pigeons.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,24, 34–46.
Kirkpatrick-Steger, K., Wasserman, E. A., &Biederman, I. (2000). The pigeon’s discrimination of shape and location information.Visual Cognition,7, 417–436.
Kruschke, J. K. (1992). ALCOVE: An exemplar-based connectionist model of category learning.Psychological Review,99, 22–44.
McKelvie, S. J. (1973). The meaningfulness and meaning of schematic faces.Perception & Psychophysics,14, 343–348.
McKelvie, S. J. (1976). The effects of verbal labelling on recognition memory for schematic faces.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,28, 459–474.
Medin, D. L., &Schaffer, M. M. (1978). Context theory of classification learning.Psychological Review,85, 207–238.
Nosofsky, R. M. (1986). Attention, similarity, and the identification-categorization of integral stimuli.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,13, 87–108.
Pearce, J. M. (1994). Similarity and discrimination: A selective review and connectionist model.Psychological Review,101, 587–607.
Pearce, J. M., &Redhead, E. S. (1993). The influence of an irrelevant stimulus on two discriminations.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,19, 180–190.
Pomerantz, J. R. (1991). The structure of visual configurations: Stimulus versus subject contributions. In G. R. Lockhead & J. R. Pomerantz (Eds.),The perception of structure (pp. 195–210). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Pomerantz, J. R., Sager, L. C., &Stoever, R. J. (1977). Perception of wholes and of their component parts: Some configural superiority effects.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,3, 422–435.
Tanaka, J. W., &Farah, M. J. (1991). Second-order relational properties and the inversion effect: Testing a theory of face perception.Perception & Psychophysics,50, 367–372.
Tanaka, J. W., &Farah, M. J. (1993). Parts and wholes in face recognition.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,46A, 225–245.
Todrin, D. C., &Blough, D. S. (1983). The discrimination of mirrorimage forms by pigeons.Perception & Psychophysics,34, 397–402.
Ushitani, T., Fujita, K., &Yamanaka, R. (2001). Do pigeons (Columba livia) perceive object unity?Animal Cognition,4, 153–161.
Van Hamme, L. J., Wasserman, E. A., &Biederman, I. (1992). Discrimination of contour-deleted images by pigeons.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes,18, 387–399.
Wald, A. (1947).Sequential analysis. New York: Dover.
Watanabe, S. (1988). Failure of visual prototype learning in the pigeon.Animal Learning & Behavior,16, 147–152.
Yamashita, H. (1991).Frontal visual field position and visual discrimination learning in the pigeon (Columba livia). (Doctoral dissertation, City University of New York).Dissertation Abstracts International,52, 1104.
Zeigler, H. P., Levitt, P. W., &Levine, R. R. (1980). Eating in the pigeon (Columba livia): Movement patterns, stereotypy, and stimulus control.Journal of Comparative & Physiological Psychology,94, 783–794.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding authors
Additional information
We thank Keith Johnson, Elisa Warga, and Peter Krzykowski for their assistance in running the subjects and two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Donis, F.J., Chase, S. & Heinemann, E.G. Effects of identical context on visual pattern recognition by pigeons. Animal Learning & Behavior 33, 90–98 (2005). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196053
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196053