ArticleCognition2022
The Lords of the Rings: People and pigeons take different paths mastering the concentric-rings categorization task.
Article in Cognition, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Discrimination of invisible spatial structures by pigeons.Learning & behavior · 2026Article
- The Pigeon as a Model of Complex Visual Processing and Category Learning.Neuroscience insights · 2024Article
- The pigeon as a machine: Complex category structures can be acquired by a simple associative model.iScience · 2023Article
- Resolving the associative learning paradox by category learning in pigeons.Current biology : CB · 2023Article
- Cognition: The power of simple associative learning.Current biology : CB · 2023Article
- The acquisition of speech categories: Beyond perceptual narrowing, beyond unsupervised learning and beyond infancy.Language, cognition and neuroscience · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
COVIS (COmpetition between Verbal and Implicit Systems; Ashby, Alfonso-Reese, & Waldron, 1998) is a prominent model of categorization which hypothesizes that humans have two independent categorization systems - one declarative, one associative - that can be recruited to solve category learning tasks. To date, most COVIS-related research has focused on just two experimental tasks: linear rule-based (RB) tasks, which purportedly encourage declarative rule use, and linear information-integration (II) tasks, which purportedly require associative learning mechanisms. We introduce and investigate a novel alternative: the concentric-rings task, a nonlinear category structure that both humans and pigeons can successfully learn and transfer to untrained exemplars. Yet, despite their broad behavioral similarities, humans and pigeons achieve their successful learning through decidedly different means. As predicted by COVIS, pigeons appear to rely solely on associative learning mechanisms, whereas humans appear to initially test but subsequently reject unidimensional rules. We discuss how variants of our concentric-rings task might yield further insights into which category-learning mechanisms are shared across species, as well as how categorization strategies might change throughout training.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.