Animal Learning & Behavior

, Volume 24, Issue 4, pp 375–383 | Cite as

Development of object permanence in the New Zealand parakeet (Cyanoramphus auriceps)

  • Mildred S. Funk
Article
  • 419 Downloads

Abstract

Eleven young kakarikis (Cyanoramphus auriceps) were tested on 15 object-permanence tasks in a standardized scale that has been used to assess the development of human infants, some nonhuman primates, and other mammals. The birds successfully completed all tasks in this scale, and many aspects of their testing were similar to human results, such as evidencing the A-not-B error. However, the birds differed slightly but significantly from human subjects in that some of the “invisible displacements” of the later tasks were performed before the earlier visible displacement tasks. These results may relate to common ecological activities of this species. Six of the birds were parent-raised; 5 were hand-raised. The hand-raised birds achieved criteria more quickly than did the parent-raised birds possibly because the former were more accustomed to the investigator and less distractible in the test situation.

References

  1. Baillargeon, R. (1987). Young infants’ reasoning about the physical and spatial characteristics of a hidden object.Cognitive Development,2, 179–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Cornell, E. H. (1978). Learning to find things: A reinterpretation of object permanence studies. In L. S. Siegel & C. J. Brainerd (Eds.),Alternatives to Piaget: Critical essays on theory (pp. 1–10). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  3. Corrigan, R. (1981). Effects of task and practice on search for invisibly displaced objects.Developmental Review,1, 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. de Blois, S., &Novak, M. (1994). Object permanence in rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta).Journal of Comparative Psychology,108, 318–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Diamond, A. (1985). Development of the ability to use recall to guide action as indicated by infants’ performance on AB error.Child Development,56, 868–883.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dore, F. (1986). Object permanence in adult cats (Felis catus).Journal of Comparative Psychology,100, 340–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dore, F. (1990). Search behaviour in cats (Felis catus) in an invisible displacement test: Cognition and experience.Canadian Journal of Psychology,44, 359–370.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Dumas, C. (1992). Object permanence in cats (Felis catus): An ecological approach to the study of invisible displacements.Journal of Comparative Psychology,106, 404–410.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dumas, C., &Brunet, C. (1994). Object permanence in capuchin monkeys: A study of invisible displacements.Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology,48, 341–358.Google Scholar
  10. Dumas, C., &Dore, F. (1989). Cognitive development in kittens (Felis catus): A cross-sectional study of object permanence.Journal of Comparative Psychology,103, 191–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dumas, C., &Dore, F. (1991). Cognitive development in kittens (Felis catus): An observational study of object permanence and sensorimotor intelligence.Journal of Comparative Psychology,105, 357–365.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dumas, C., &Wilkie, D. (1995). Object permanence in ring doves.Journal of Comparative Psychology,109, 143–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Etienne, A. S. (1973). Searching behavior towards a disappearing prey in the domestic chick as affected by preliminary experience.Animal Behaviour,21, 749–761.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Etienne, A. S. (1984). The meaning of object permanence at different zoological levels.Human Development,27, 309–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fischer, K., &Bidell, T. (1991). Constraining nativist inferences about cognitive capacities. In S. Carey & R. Gelman (Eds.),Epigenesis of mind (pp. 199–235). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  16. Fischer, K., &Jennings, S. (1981). Emergence of representation in search.Developmental Review,1, 18–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fragaszy, D., &Visalberghi, E. (1989). Social influences on the acquisition of tool-using behaviors in tufted capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella).Journal of Comparative Psychology,103, 159–170.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gagnon, S., &Dore, F. (1992). Search behavior in various breeds of adult dogs: Object permanence and olfactory cues.Journal of Comparative Psychology,106, 58–68.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gagnon, S., &Dore, F. (1993). Search behavior of dogs (Canis familiaris) in invisible displacement problems.Animal Learning & Behavior,21, 246–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gagnon, S., &Dore, F. (1994). Cross-sectional study of object permanence in domestic puppies (Canis familiaris).Journal of Comparative Psychology,108, 220–232.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Goulet, S., Dore, F., &Rousseau, R. (1994). Object permanence and working memory in cats (Felis catus).Journal of Experimental Psychology,20, 347–365.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Greene, T. (1988).Behavioural ecology of the red-crowned parakeet and yellow-crowned parakeet on Little Barrier Island. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of Auckland.Google Scholar
  23. Gruber, H., Girgus, J., &Banuazizi, A. (1971). Development of object permanence in the cat.Developmental Psychology,4, 9–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hallock, M., &Worobey, J. (1984). Cognitive development in chimpanzee infants (Pan troglodytes).Journal of Human Evolution,13, 441–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Harris, P. (1983). Infant cognition. In M. Haith & J. Campos (Eds.),Handbook of child psychology: Infancy and developmental psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 688–782). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  26. Healy, S., &Guilford, T. (1990). Olfactory-bulb size and nocturnality in birds.Evolution,44, 339–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Mandler, J. (1990). A new perspective on cognitive development in infancy.American Scientist,78, 236–243.Google Scholar
  28. Mathieu, M., &Bergeron, G. (1981). Piagetian assessment of cognitive development in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). In A. B. Chiarelli á R. S. Corruccini (Eds.),Primate behavior and sociobiology (pp. 142–147). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  29. Meltzoff, A., Kuhl, P., &Moore, M. (1991). Perception, representation, and the control of action in newborn and young infants. In M. Weiss & P. Zelago (Eds.),Newborn attention (pp. 377–411). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
  30. Miller, D., Cohen, L., &Hill, K. (1970). A methodological investigation of Piaget’s theory of object concept development in the sensorymotor period.Journal of Experimental Psychology,9, 59–85.Google Scholar
  31. Natale, F., &Antinucci, F. (1989). Stage 6 object concept and repre sentation. In A. Antinucci (Ed.),Cognitive structure and development in nonhuman primates (pp. 97–112). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  32. Nixon, A. (1982).Aspects of the ecology and morphology of Cyanoramphus parakeets and hybrids from Mangere Island, Chatham Islands. Unpublished master’s thesis, Victoria University.Google Scholar
  33. Parker, S. T. (1977). Piaget’s sensorimotor series in an infant macaque. In S. Chevalier-Skolnikoff & F. E. Poirier (Eds.),Primate biosocial development: Biological, social and ecological determinants (pp. 43–112). New York: Garland.Google Scholar
  34. Parker, S. T., &Gibson, K. R. (1977). Object manipulation, tool use and sensorimotor intelligence as feeding adaptations in Cebus monkeys and great apes.Journal of Human Evolution,6, 623–641.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Pasnak, R., Kurkjian, M., &Triana, E. (1988). Assessment of Stage 6 object permanence.Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society,26, 368–370.Google Scholar
  36. Pepperberg, I. M., &Funk, M. S. (1990). Object permanence in four species of psittacine birds: An African Grey parrot (Psittacus erithacus), an Illiger mini macaw (Ara maracana), a parakeet (Melopsittacus undulatus), and a cockatiel (Nymphicus hollandicus).Animal Learning & Behavior,18, 97–108.Google Scholar
  37. Pepperberg, I. M., &Kozak, F. (1986). Object permanence in the African Grey parrot (Psittacus erithacus).Animal Learning & Behavior,14, 322–330.Google Scholar
  38. Piaget, J. (1953).Origin of intelligence in the child. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  39. Piaget, J. (1954).The construction of reality in the child. New York: Basic Books.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Poti, P. (1989). Early sensorimotor development in Macaques. In F. Antinucci (Ed.),Cognitive structure and development in nonhuman primates (pp. 39–53). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  41. Redshaw, M. (1978). Cognitive development in human and gorilla infants.Journal of Human Evolution,7, 133–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Schino, G., Spinozzi, G., &Berlinguer, L. (1990). Object concept and mental representation inCebus apella andMacaca fascicularis.Primates,31, 537–544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Spinozzi, G., &Natale, F. (1989). Early sensorimotor development in gorilla. In F. Antinucci (Ed.),Cognitive structure and development in nonhuman primates (pp. 21–38). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  44. Stettner, L. J., &Matyniak, K. (1968). The brain of birds.Scientific American,218, 64–76.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Taylor, R. (1985). Status, habits and conservation ofCyanoramphus parakeets in the New Zealand region. In P. J. Moore (Ed.),Conservation of island birds: Case studies for the management of threatened island species (pp. 195–211). Cambridge, U.K.: International Council of Bird Preservation.Google Scholar
  46. Tinklepaugh, O. T. (1928). An experimental study of representative factors in monkeys.Journal of Comparative Psychology,8, 197–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Tinklepaugh, O. T. (1932). Multiple delayed reaction with chimpanzees and monkeys.Journal of Comparative Psychology,13, 207–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Triana, E., &Pasnak, R. (1981). Object permanence in cats and dogs.Animal Learning & Behavior,9, 135–139.Google Scholar
  49. Uzgiris, I. C. (1987). The study of sequential order in cognitive development. In I. C. Uzgiris & J. M. Hunt (Eds.),Infant performance and experience: New findings with the ordinal scales (pp. 131–167). Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  50. Uzgiris, I. C., &Hunt, J. M. (1975).Assessment in infancy: Ordinal scales of psychological development. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  51. Vaughter, R. M., Smotherman, W., &Ordry, J. M. (1972). Development of object permanence in the infant squirrel monkey.Developmental Psychology,7, 34–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Wellman, H.,Cross, D., &Bartsch, K. (1986). Infant search and object permanence: A meta-analysis of the A-not-B error.Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development,51(3, Serial No. 214).Google Scholar
  53. Wise, K. L., Wise, L. A., &Zimmerman, R. R. (1974). Piagetian object permanence in the infant rhesus monkey.Developmental Psychology,10, 429–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Wood, S., Moriarty, K. M., Gardner, B. T., &Gardner, R. A. (1980). Object permanence in child and chimpanzee.Animal Learning & Behavior,8, 3–9.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mildred S. Funk
    • 1
  1. 1.Northwestern UniversityEvanston

Personalised recommendations