Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Behaviour > Lecture 3 - Learning by Number > Flashcards

Lecture 3 - Learning by Number Flashcards

1
Q

What does comparative psychology ask?

A

How do animals do these things
Is it the same way humans do them
Need to do analysis tasks to ask these questions
Learn more about our abilities too

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What is associative learning

A

Works in all animals
Doesn’t just glue things that occur together - sensitive correlations
Track causal relationship
Connectionist networks - language, pattern recognition

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

What abilities are involved in numerical competence

A
  1. Relative numerosity discrimination
  2. Absolute number discrimination
  3. Ability to count
  4. Ability to do arithmetic
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

What is relative numerosity discrimination

A

Ability discrimination between sets of items on basis of relative number items they contain
Discriminate many from few

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Who was the first person to research Relative Numerosity Discrimination

A

Koehler 1913
Given raised dots
Choose which fewer dots
Especially good with pigeons

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Outline Emmerton, Lohmann and Niemann 1997 study on relative numerosity discrimination

A

Trained pigeons to discriminate between few and many items
Discriminated between few and many pictures in box.
Pecked red button when few items. Pecked green button when menu items. Face value present

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Criticism of Emmerton, Lohmann and Niemann 1997

A

Birds are ignoring numbers, and instead using another feature of display
Don’t have to pay attention to number dots on screen
Rule this out by inversing display
Generalise responses

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

What is the concept of absolute number

A

Understand that 4 bananas and 4 elephants have something in common
I.e. number is not intrinsically related to what you are counting

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Outline Koehlers concept of absolute number

A

Jakob the raven could choose a pot with 5 spots from array, even when size spot varied 50 fold

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Outline Matsuzawa 1985 concept of absolute number

A

Chimp called Ai had to select 1 of 6 responses keys (labelled 1-6) when shown array of red pencils, with 1-6 pencils per array
Achieved greater 90% accuracy

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Criticism of Matsuzawa 1985 concept of absolute number

A

Not necessarily same as counting. Animals could be learning about specific perceptual pattern - perceptual matching (look similar nothing to do with number)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Matsuzawa counter argument to criticism

A

Ai could transfer her ability to arrays of different types of items

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

What is the perceptual matching problem

A

Number confounded with other factors such as time (items presented serially) and space (items presented simultaneously)
Are animals using these cues?
Is size of display controlling response? Smaller number items takes up less space

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

How did Pepperberg 1994 try to address perceptual matching problem

A

Alex the parrot about number of blocks that were green, or blue, or red

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

What is a sample trial of Pepperberg 1194 and Alex the Parrot

A

1 orange chalk, 2 orange wood, 4 purple wood and 5 purple chalk
How many purple wood?
Used seeing smaller number items and can perceive directly. Larger numbers physically count

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

What is the alternative explanation of Subitising

A

Perception at a glance of number items present without counting them successively
Maximum number items be counted this way is 5
If you are counting then RT increase with every time

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

How does effect size criticise the Subitising approach

A

Effect of display size with displays less than 5 items
Takes longer perceive twoness than oneness etc
Even with small displays we are using a counting process

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Outline Meck and Church 1983 study on serially presented items

A

Rats trained 2 signals - 2 or 8 pulses
After 2 - press left lever
After 8 - press right lever

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Criticism of Meck and Church 1983 original study

A

We’re animals responding on basis of total time rather than number pulses?

20
Q

Meck and Church 1983 experiment 2 on serially presented items

A 
Both stimuli lasted 4 seconds 
2 bursts or 8 bursts light 
If rats were responding based on stimulus durations this task be impossible
Continue to respond correctly 
Evidence against perceptual matching
21
Q

Outline Davis and Bradford 1986 study on rats

A

Rats access to plank with food pellets on
Eat rat designated number pellets to eat
Ate right amount rewarded. Ate more shouted at.
Continued to get it correct even when no longer rewarded. Transferred to sunflower seeds
Train and generalise

22
Q

Outline Capaldi and Miller 1988 study on rats

A

Rats trained runway sometimes with food at end.
Rats expect food they run fast
Trained following sequences RRRN and NRRRN
Learn to anticipate final N trial and run slow
Generalised to other rewards e.g. coco pops

23
Q

Helmand and Gallistel 1978 study on the ability to count

A

Counting involved mapping numerosity (property display) onto label represented numerosity
Animals use nonverbal labels = numerons

24
Q

Outline concept of Absolute Number

A

Understand 4 bananas and 4 elephants have something in common i.e. number is not intrinsically related to what you are counting

25
Q

Outline Koehler study on Absolute Number

A

Jakob the raven could choose pot with 5 spots from array, even when size spots varied 50-fold

26
Q

Outline Matsuzawa 1985 study on the concept of Absolute Number

A

Chimp Ai had select 1 of 6 response keys when shown arrays red pencils, with 1-6 pencils per array. Achieved > 90% accuracy

27
Q

Outline criticism of Matsuzawa 1985 study

A

Not necessarily counting, could be learning specific perceptual pattern - perceptual matching (look similar nothing to do with number)

28
Q

What is Matsuzawa counter-argument

A

Ai could transfer her ability to array different types of item. Not just perceptual matching

29
Q

Outline Perceptual Matching Problem

A

Number confounded with other factors such as time (serial items) and space (simultaneous).
E.g. smaller number items takes up less space. Size display control response?
Act as cues?

30
Q

How did Pepperberg 1994 try to rule out use of visual arrays?

A

Alex the Parrot about number blocks green, blue or red in mixture blocks.

31
Q

Are animals subitising?

A

Perception at a glance of number items present, without counting them successively, max number items counted 5.
If counting RT increase every item.
Subitising little increase RT per item for low numbers items.
Number bigger 6, have count each one.

32
Q

Criticism of animals Subitising?

A

Effect of display size with displays less than 5 items or less. Takes longer perceive “twoness” than “oneness”. Suggests even with small displays we are using counting process

33
Q

Outline Meck and Church 1983 study on serially presented items

A

Rats trained 2 and 8 pulses white noise. After 2 pulses rewarded left lever. After 8 rewarded right lever.
But were animals responding on basis total time (8 pulses longer present), rather number pulses?

34
Q

Outline Meck and Church 1983 study number 2 on serially presented items

A

Devised test both stimuli lasted 4 seconds. Presented 2 bursts or 8 bursts light both lasting 4 seconds causing them pay attention. If responding based stimulus durations task be impossible. Continue to respond correctly.
Evidence against perceptual matching.

35
Q

Outline Davis and Bradford 1986 study on rats

A

Access plank with food pellets. Each rat designated number pellets eat. Ate more = experimenter shouted NO. Eat right amount = rewarded. Continued get correct even when no longer rewarded. Transferred sunflower seeds. Train and generalise

36
Q

Outline Capaldi and Miller 1988

A

Rats trained runway, sometimes food end. Rts expected food run fast. Trained following sequences reinforced trials and non-reinforced trials. Learn anticipate final N trial and run slow.
Not result of time.
Same findings for coco pops.

37
Q

Outline Gelman and Gallistel 1978 study on the Ability to Count

A

Mapping numerosity- property display onto label represented numerosity.
Animals nonverbal labels call numerons.

38
Q

What are the 3 principles involved in counting

A
  1. One-to-One counting
  2. Stable-Order principle
  3. Cardinal-Principle
39
Q

Outline principle involved in counting

A
  1. One-to-One counting - each item assigned only 1 numeron
  2. Stable-Order principle - numerons always assigned same order
  3. Cardinal-Principle - final numeron assigned applies whole display
    Implies knowledge order labels. Relative quantity (ordinal scale) and size difference between each item same (interval scale)
40
Q

Outline Biro and Matzuzawa 2000 study of the representation of number in chimps

A

Ai trained touch Arabic numerals ascending order

Some argued rote learning particular stimulus-response sequence - no knowing quantitative relation between numbers

41
Q

Outline Brannon and Terrace 2000 study on the representation of number in chimps

A

Chimps trained order arrays 1-4. Learn ascending and descending orders but not arbitrary order.
Generalise from ascending order immediately to higher numbers. Descending order only generalise after further training. Implies limited understanding ordering quantities.

42
Q

Outline Pepperberg 2000 study

A

Alex the Parrot. Knew naming quantities and identifying numbers - not about applying numbers to quantities
Perform better than chance from start - relate written numbers with quantities

43
Q

Outline the ability to do arithmetic

A

Perform addition, subtraction, some extent by rote learning

But mathematical competence allow operations be generalised new situations in way implies concept number

44
Q

Outline Boysen and Berntson 1989 study on maths in chimps

A

Chimp Sheba trained label arrays counters, then Arabic numerals. e.g. when presented item, press number 1. Generalised to everyday objects. Final test: number oranges hidden lab. Sheba find them. Pick Arabic number represented sum all oranges. After 12 training sessions 85% correct.

45
Q

Outline the issues with Boysen and Bernston 1989 study with Sheba

A

Argue she memorised all ways of adding to total of 4

Effects of contextual variables. Animals can be more competent than they appear

46
Q

Counter-argument of criticisms of Boysen and Bernston 1989 study with Sheba

A

Sheba also perform accurately when experimenters hid cards with numbers written on, rather than oranges. Performed above chance straight away. Implies understanding interval scale. If she only understood that 1 number bigger than another she would have chosen 4 as often as 3.

47
Q

Outline Boysen and Bertson 1995 study

A

Chimp A choice between 2 amount candy. Whichever chimp A chose was then given to chimp B, Chimp A got the unchosen one.
It was in Chimps A interest choose smaller quantity so it could eat larger.
Completely unable solve this task. Unless candy substituted by numerals.
Evidence cant count? Or cant resist a treat?

Behaviour (16 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions