Cognitive mechanisms for transitive inference performance in rhesus monkeys: measuring the influence of associative strength and inferred order.

Regina Paxton Gazes, Nicholas W Chee, Robert R Hampton
Author Information
  1. Regina Paxton Gazes: Department of Psychology, Emory University, GA, USA. rgazes@zooatlanta.org

Abstract

If Ben is taller than Emily and Emily is taller than Dina, one can infer that Ben is taller than Dina. This process of inferring relations between stimuli based on shared relations with other stimuli is called transitive inference (TI). Many species solve TI tasks in which they learn pairs of overlapping stimulus discriminations (A+B-, B+C-, etc.) and are tested with non-adjacent novel test pairings (BD). When relations between stimuli are determined by reinforcement (A is reinforced when paired with B, B when paired with C), performance can be controlled by the associative values of individual stimuli or by logical inference. In Experiment 1 rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta) chose the higher ranked item on non-adjacent test trials after training on a 7-image TI task. In Experiment 2 we measured the associative values of 7 TI images and found that these values did not correlate with choice in TI tests. In Experiment 3 large experimental manipulations of the associative value of images did influence performance in some TI test pairings, but performance on other pairs was consistent with the implied order. In Experiment 4 monkeys linked two previously learned 7-item lists into one 14-item list after training with a single linking pair. Linking cannot be explained by associative values. Associative value can control choice in TI tests in at least some extreme circumstances. Implied order better explains most TI choices in monkeys, and is a more viable mechanism for TI of social dominance, which has been observed in birds and fish.

References

  1. Behav Neurosci. 1996 Oct;110(5):887-97 [PMID: 8918992]
  2. Cognition. 2008 Aug;108(2):590-9 [PMID: 18514179]
  3. Neuroscience. 2007 Oct 12;149(1):7-27 [PMID: 17850977]
  4. Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2008 Aug;61(8):1143-50 [PMID: 18938779]
  5. Exp Brain Res. 2010 Mar;201(3):599-605 [PMID: 19888566]
  6. Nature. 1971 Aug 13;232(5311):456-8 [PMID: 4937205]
  7. Percept Psychophys. 2004 May;66(4):651-64 [PMID: 15311664]
  8. J Comp Physiol Psychol. 1958 Dec;51(6):737-41 [PMID: 13620815]
  9. Behav Neurosci. 2009 Feb;123(1):109-14 [PMID: 19170435]
  10. Behav Neurosci. 1996 Aug;110(4):831-5 [PMID: 8864273]
  11. Mem Cognit. 2001 Sep;29(6):893-902 [PMID: 11716062]
  12. Anim Cogn. 2010 Jan;13(1):121-31 [PMID: 19533183]
  13. Anim Behav. 2008 Aug;76(2):479-486 [PMID: 19649139]
  14. Hippocampus. 2010 Aug;20(8):894-901 [PMID: 20054816]
  15. Neuroreport. 2002 May 24;13(7):939-44 [PMID: 12004195]
  16. J Comp Psychol. 2007 Aug;121(3):250-9 [PMID: 17696651]
  17. Brain Cogn. 2011 Nov;77(2):315-23 [PMID: 21839568]
  18. Cognition. 2010 Nov;117(2):191-202 [PMID: 20846645]
  19. J Neurosci. 2004 Nov 3;24(44):9811-25 [PMID: 15525766]
  20. Nat Neurosci. 2002 May;5(5):458-62 [PMID: 11976705]
  21. Psychiatry Res. 2009 Apr 30;172(1):24-30 [PMID: 19216061]
  22. Learn Mem. 2010 Feb 26;17(3):161-7 [PMID: 20189961]
  23. Hippocampus. 2009 Jan;19(1):8-19 [PMID: 18727046]
  24. Neuroscience. 2011 Jan 26;173:110-5 [PMID: 21075173]
  25. J Exp Anal Behav. 2004 Jul;82(1):1-19 [PMID: 15484868]
  26. Nature. 1967 Sep 30;215(5109):1519-20 [PMID: 6052760]
  27. Behav Processes. 2006 May 1;72(2):161-72 [PMID: 16460886]
  28. Hippocampus. 2004;14(7):808-18 [PMID: 15382251]
  29. J Comp Psychol. 1992 Dec;106(4):342-9 [PMID: 1451416]
  30. Nature. 2004 Aug 12;430(7001):778-81 [PMID: 15306809]
  31. Behav Processes. 1997 Jan;39(1):95-112 [PMID: 24896713]
  32. Behav Processes. 2012 Mar;89(3):244-55 [PMID: 22178714]
  33. J Exp Anal Behav. 1976 Nov;26(3):335-47 [PMID: 16811952]
  34. Nature. 1977 Jun 23;267(5613):694-6 [PMID: 406574]
  35. Behav Processes. 1996 Sep;37(2-3):185-95 [PMID: 24897441]
  36. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 2003 Jul;29(3):211-21 [PMID: 12884680]
  37. Nature. 2007 Jan 25;445(7126):429-32 [PMID: 17251980]
  38. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1997 Jun 24;94(13):7109-14 [PMID: 9192700]
  39. J Comp Physiol Psychol. 1961 Feb;54:56-8 [PMID: 13684319]
  40. Psychol Res. 2010 Mar;74(2):207-18 [PMID: 19452163]
  41. Hippocampus. 2004;14(2):153-62 [PMID: 15098721]
  42. Am J Psychol. 1953 Jan;66(1):131-5 [PMID: 13030859]
  43. Psychol Res. 1996;59(2):81-93 [PMID: 8810583]
  44. J Cogn Neurosci. 2006 Jul;18(7):1156-73 [PMID: 16839289]
  45. Behav Processes. 1996 Dec;38(3):241-52 [PMID: 24896484]
  46. J Comp Psychol. 2011 May;125(2):227-38 [PMID: 21341909]
  47. Behav Processes. 2008 Jul;78(3):313-34 [PMID: 18423898]
  48. Behav Processes. 2010 Oct;85(3):283-92 [PMID: 20708664]
  49. Learn Mem. 2004 May-Jun;11(3):328-36 [PMID: 15169863]
  50. Anim Cogn. 2002 Jun;5(2):97-105 [PMID: 12150042]
  51. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 1996 Jan;22(1):105-17 [PMID: 8568492]

Grants

  1. R01 MH082819/NIMH NIH HHS
  2. P51 OD011132/NIH HHS
  3. P51OD11132/NIH HHS
  4. P51RR165/NCRR NIH HHS
  5. 1R01MH082819/NIMH NIH HHS

MeSH Term

Analysis of Variance
Animals
Association Learning
Attention
Choice Behavior
Cognition
Discrimination, Psychological
Macaca mulatta
Male
Pattern Recognition, Visual
Photic Stimulation
Problem Solving
Reaction Time
Reinforcement, Psychology

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0TIassociativestimuliperformancevaluesExperimenttallercanrelationsinferencetestmonkeysorderBenEmilyDinaonetransitivepairsnon-adjacentpairingspairedBrhesustrainingimageschoicetestsvalueinfluenceinferprocessinferringbasedsharedcalledManyspeciessolvetaskslearnoverlappingstimulusdiscriminationsA+B-B+C-etctestednovelBDdeterminedreinforcementreinforcedCcontrolledindividuallogical1Macacamulattachosehigherrankeditemtrials7-imagetask2measured7foundcorrelate3largeexperimentalmanipulationsconsistentimplied4linkedtwopreviouslylearned7-itemlists14-itemlistsinglelinkingpairLinkingexplainedAssociativecontrolleastextremecircumstancesImpliedbetterexplainschoicesviablemechanismsocialdominanceobservedbirdsfishCognitivemechanismsmonkeys:measuringstrengthinferred

Similar Articles

Cited By