Object permanence in the pigeon (Columba livia): Insertion of a delay prior to choice facilitates visible- and invisible-displacement accuracy

The evolution of social play in songbirds, parrots and cockatoos - emotional or highly complex cognitive behaviour or both?

Social play has been described in many animals. However, much of this social behaviour among birds, particularly in adults, is still relatively unexplored in terms of the environmental, psychological, and social dynamics of play. This paper provides an overview of what we know about adult social play in birds and addresses areas in which subtleties and distinctions, such as in play initiation and social organisation and its relationship to expressions of play, are considered in detail. The paper considers emotional, social, innovative, and cognitive aspects of play, then the environmental conditions and affiliative bonds, suggesting a surprisingly complex framework of criteria awaiting further research. Adult social play has so far been studied in only a small number of avian species, exclusively in those with a particularly large brain relative to body size without necessarily addressing brain functions and lateralization. When lateralization of brain function is considered, it can further illuminate a possibly significant relevance of play behaviour to the evolution of cognition, to management of emotions, and the development of sociality.

Decision making under risk: framing effects in pigeon risk preferences

When humans face probabilistic outcomes, their choices often depend on whether the choice is framed in terms of losses or gains. In the present research, we gave pigeons a choice between risky (variable) outcomes and safe (constant) outcomes that resulted in the same net reward. In Experiment 1, in which the outcomes represented a loss, the pigeons preferred the risky alternative. In Experiment 2, in which the outcomes represented a gain, the pigeons were indifferent between the two alternatives. In Experiment 3, in which the outcomes represented neither a gain nor a loss, the pigeons strongly preferred the risky alternative. The results were interpreted in terms of the relative value of gains and losses given to the alternatives by pigeons in the context of a risky and safe choice. In Experiment 4 we tested that hypothesis by giving pigeons a choice between a risky and safe alternative with the same net outcome, in the context of a gain associated with the safe alternative, but no gain or loss associated with the risky alternative. In support of the interpretation of the first three experiments, with the safe alternative associated with a gain, the pigeons now preferred the safe alternative. These results were discussed in terms of economic and foraging theories and were contrasted with the aversion to uncertainty (risk) more typically shown by humans.

Horses' (Equus caballus) Ability to Solve Visible but Not Invisible Displacement Tasks Is Associated With Frustration Behavior and Heart Rate

Many frameworks have assessed the ultimate and ontogenetic underpinnings in the development of object permanence, but less is known about whether individual characteristics, such as sex or training level, as well as proximate factors, such as arousal or emotional state, affect performance in these tasks. The current study investigated horses’ performance in visible and invisible displacement tasks and assessed whether specific ontogenetic, behavioral, and physiological factors were associated with performance. The study included 39 Icelandic horses aged 2–25 years, of varying training levels. The horses were exposed to three tasks: (a) a choice test (n = 37), (b) a visible displacement task (n = 35), and (c) an invisible displacement task (n = 31). 27 horses in the choice test, and 8 horses in the visible displacement task, performed significantly better than expected by chance, while none did so in the invisible displacement task. This was also reflected in their group performance, where horses performed above chance level in the choice task and the visible displacement task only. In the invisible displacement task, the group performed significantly worse than expected by chance indicating that horses persistently chose the side where they had last seen the target. None of the individual characteristics included in the study had an effect on performance. Unsuccessful horses had higher heart rate levels, and expressed more behavior indicative of frustration, likely because of their inability to solve the task. The increased frustration/arousal could lead to a negative feedback loop, which might hamper performance in subsequent trials. Care should thus be taken in future experimental designs to closely monitor the arousal level of the tested individuals in order to safeguard comparability.

"What you see may not be what you get": Reverse contingency and perceived loss aversion in pigeons

The reverse-contingency task is a task in which one is given a choice between two rewards, but one receives the larger amount only if one chooses the smaller amount. This task is very difficult for chimpanzees unless the choice is between symbolic representations of the amounts. We found that pigeons can learn this task easily, if the reward amounts are associated with distinctive colors and the choice is delayed by 5 s. The reverse-contingency task involves three components: a loss when choosing one alternative, a gain when choosing the other, and the contrast between what was expected and what occurred. In Experiment 2 we separated the loss from the gain and found that experiencing a loss is sufficient for pigeons to learn to avoid that alternative. Finally, we found evidence for perceived loss aversion. When pigeons were offered a small amount of food and they received that amount, they preferred it over an alternative that offered them a larger amount but gave them only the smaller amount (a perceived loss). The results indicate that loss aversion, based on reference dependence, is likely a general phenomenon, and not only found in humans and other primates. We suggest that it can be attributed to contrast, the difference between what is expected and what is obtained, and it is related to the endowment effect and the mere ownership effect found in humans.

Pigeons are attracted to a perceived gain without an actual gain

Reference dependence refers to the reduced value of a reward that is less than expected, or the added value of a reward that is greater than expected. There is evidence that when pigeons are offered an alternative that has 1 pellet versus an alternative that has 2 pellets, but one of the two pellets offered will be removed, the pigeons prefer the originally presented 1 pellet (loss aversion). In the present research, we tested for the opposite effect (gain attraction). In Experiments 1 and 2, pigeons could choose between 2 pellets, each one on a distinctive background. If they chose the optimal alternative, they received a second pellet. In Experiment 2, the second pellet obtained was the one not initially chosen (a task sometimes referred to as the ephemeral reward task). Pigeons learned to choose optimally in both experiments. In Experiment 3, we tested the pigeons for reference dependence. Pigeons were given an alternative that offered them one pellet or two pellets, if they chose the one-pellet alternative, they received an additional pellet, and if they chose the two-pellet alternative, they received the two pellets. In keeping with the reference dependence hypothesis, the pigeons preferred the 1-pellet alternative that gave them an extra pellet. These effects are related to similar findings with humans, including the endowment effect.

Horses Solve Visible but Not Invisible Displacement Tasks in an Object Permanence Paradigm

A key question in the field of animal cognition is how animals comprehend their physical world. Object permanence is one of the fundamental features of physical cognition. It is the ability to reason about hidden objects and to mentally reconstruct their invisible displacements. This cognitive skill has been studied in a wide range of species but never directly in the horse (Equus caballus). In this study, we therefore assessed the understanding of visible and invisible displacements in adult Welsh mares in two complementary experiments, using different horses. In experiment 1, visible displacement was investigated using two tasks adapted from the Uzgiris and Hunt scale 1. Invisible displacement was assessed using a transposition task, in which food was first hidden in one of two containers and the location of the containers was then switched. In experiment 2, we further investigated horses’ understanding of visible and invisible displacements using an easier procedure designed to avoid potentially confounding factors. In both experiments, horses successfully completed the tasks involving visible displacement with two or three possible hiding places. However, in both experiments, horses failed the transposition tasks, suggesting that they may not be able to track the displacement of an object that is not directly perceived (i.e., invisible displacement). These results bring new insights into object permanence in horses and how they represent their physical world.

The paradoxical performance by different species on the ephemeral reward task

The ephemeral reward task consists of giving an animal a choice between two distinctive stimuli, A and B (e.g., black and white), on each of which is placed a bit of food. If the animal chooses the food on A, it gets that reinforcer, but the other stimulus, B, is removed, and the trial is over. If it chooses the food on B, however, it gets that food and the stimulus A remains, so it can have that food as well. Thus, choice of stimulus B gives the animal two reinforcers rather than one. Wrasse (cleaner fish) easily learn to choose optimally, whereas surprisingly, most non-human primates do not. Parrots, however, appear to learn this task as easily as the fish. To test the hypothesis that animals that choose with their mouth can learn it, we tested pigeons and found that they show no evidence of optimal learning with this task (with either the manual presentation of the stimuli or the operant presentation of the stimuli). Similarly, rats show no evidence of optimal learning. However, if a 20-s delay (fixed-interval schedule) is inserted between stimulus choice and reinforcement, both pigeons and rats learn to perform optimally. The ephemeral reward task appears to promote impulsive choice in several species, but with this task (and others), inserting a delay between choice and reinforcement promotes more careful choice, leading to optimal performance.

Pigeons can learn a difficult discrimination if reinforcement is delayed following choice

Delaying reinforcement typically has been thought to retard the rate of acquisition of an association, but there is evidence that it may facilitate acquisition of some difficult simultaneous discriminations. After describing several cases in which delaying reinforcement can facilitate acquisition, we suggest that under conditions in which the magnitude of reinforcement is difficult to discriminate, the introduction of a delay between choice and reinforcement can facilitate the discrimination. In the present experiment, we tested the hypothesis that the discrimination between one pellet of food for choice of one alternative and two pellets of food for choice of another may be a difficult discrimination when choice consists of a single peck. If a 10-s delay occurs between choice and reinforcement, however, the discrimination is significantly easier. It is suggested that when discrimination between the outcomes of a choice is difficult and impulsive choice leads to immediate reinforcement, acquisition may be retarded. Under these conditions, the introduction of a brief delay may facilitate acquisition.

A comparative analysis of the dopaminergic innervation of the executive caudal nidopallium in pigeon, chicken, zebra finch, and carrion crow

Despite the long, separate evolutionary history of birds and mammals, both lineages developed a rich behavioral repertoire of remarkably similar executive control generated by distinctly different brains. The seat for executive functioning in birds is the nidopallium caudolaterale (NCL) and the mammalian equivalent is known as the prefrontal cortex (PFC). Both are densely innervated by dopaminergic fibers, and are an integration center of sensory input and motor output. Whereas the variation of the PFC has been well documented in different mammalian orders, we know very little about the NCL across the avian clade. In order to investigate whether this structure adheres to species-specific variations, this study aimed to describe the trajectory of the NCL in pigeon, chicken, carrion crow and zebra finch. We employed immunohistochemistry to map dopaminergic innervation, and executed a Gallyas stain to visualize the dorsal arcopallial tract that runs between the NCL and the arcopallium. Our analysis showed that whereas the trajectory of the NCL in the chicken is highly comparable to the pigeon, the two Passeriformes show a strikingly different pattern. In both carrion crow and zebra finch, we identified four different subareas of high dopaminergic innervation that span the entire caudal forebrain. Based on their sensory input, motor output, and involvement in dopamine-related cognitive control of the delineated areas here, we propose that at least three morphologically different subareas constitute the NCL in these songbirds. Thus, our study shows that comparable to the PFC in mammals, the NCL in birds varies considerably across species.

Enhancing "self-control": The paradoxical effect of delay of reinforcement

Delay of reinforcement is generally thought to be inversely correlated with speed of acquisition. However, in the case of simultaneous discrimination learning, in which choice results in immediate reinforcement, delay of reinforcement can improve acquisition. For example, in the ephemeral reward task, animals are given a choice between two alternatives, A and B. Choice of A provides reinforcement, and the trial is over. Choice of B provides reinforcement and access to alternative A (thus, two reinforcements). Many animals appear unable to learn to choose B consistently, but inserting a 20-s delay between choice and outcome has been shown to facilitate optimal choice. Similarly, pigeons given a choice between a signal for one pellet and a signal for two pellets (each occurring without a delay) have difficulty learning to choose the two-pellet alternative, unless the reinforcement is delayed. In a version of object permanence, food is placed in one of two containers, and the pigeon must choose the container with the food. Pigeons have difficulty reliably choosing the correct container unless a brief delay is inserted between baiting and choice. Finally, pigeons have been shown to prefer a suboptimal alternative (a 20% chance of getting a cue for reinforcement) over an optimal alternative (a 100% chance of getting a cue for 50% reinforcement). However, if pigeons are forced to wait 20 s following their choice to receive the cues, no preference for the suboptimal alternative is found. Thus, impulsive choice may be reduced by delaying the consequence of that choice.