Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35378692›Full record

ArticleLearning & behavior2022

Evidence for object-place binding in pigeons in a sequence-learning procedure.

Aaron P Blaisdell, Julia E Schroeder

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Learning & behavior, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Aaron P BlaisdellUCLA Department of Psychology, University of California, 1285 Franz Hall, Los Angeles, CA, 90095-1563, USA. blaisdell@psych.ucla.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-6063-1010
Julia E SchroederUCLA Department of Psychology, University of California, 1285 Franz Hall, Los Angeles, CA, 90095-1563, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We studied object-location binding in pigeons using a sequence learning procedure. A sequence of four objects was presented, one at a time at one of four locations on a touchscreen. A single peck at the object ended the trial, and food reinforcement was delivered intermittently. In Experiment 1, a between-subjects design was used to present objects, locations, or both in a regular sequence or randomly. Response time costs on nonreinforced probe tests on which object order, location order, or both were disrupted revealed sequence learning effects. Pigeons encoded location order when it was consistent, but not object order when it alone was consistent. When both were consistent, pigeons encoded both, and showed evidence of object-location binding. In Experiment 2, two groups of pigeons received training on sequences where the same object always appeared at the same location. For some pigeons a consistent sequence was used while for others sequence order was randomized. Only when sequence order was consistent was object-location binding found. These experiments are the first demonstrations of strong and lasting feature binding in pigeons and are consistent with a functional account of learning.

Indexed as

ColumbidaeDiscrimination LearningAnimalsHumansReaction TimeReinforcement, PsychologyBindingPigeonsSequence learning

Identifiers

PMID35378692
PMCPMC9468098

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.