Pepperberg Flashcards
Which of the learning approach assumptions does Pepperberg apply to?
- Social learning helps to explain changes in behaviour - model/rival approach, attention, retention, production, motivation
- Conditioning helps to explain changes in behaviour - operant conditioning using reward
Explain social learning theory
our environment is a key part of learning, and through this we can learn things.
- Attention
- Retention
- Motivation
- Production
Explain operant conditioning
Operant conditioning is learning through outcome. It uses reinforcement and punishment - whether that is positive or negative.
Explain the model/rival technique used in Pepperberg
- Two people, One the model/rival, and one the “trainer” (swapped regularly)
- Model/Rival was to answer questions given on the same/different concept, and was to answer correctly or incorrectly
- “trainer” was to ask set questions, and give correct punishment (“NO!”), or reinforcement (Giving object)
- Alex was allowed to intervene with his “rival” when he wanted to.
What is the concept being studied in Pepperberg?
the concept of Same/different
Explain the Concept being studied in Pepperberg
Same/different is using symbols (in this case vocal for Alex) to show understanding of similarities in objects, and oddity from objects.
What is the psychology being investigated in Pepperberg?
- Social learning theory
- Operant conditioning (mainly reward given here)
What is the aim of Pepperberg?
To test whether an avian subject, such as an African Grey Parrot, can use vocal labels to demonstrate symbolic understanding of the concept of same/different
Hypothesis of Pepperberg
(not specifically said in the study)
- There will be a difference to how Alex responds to familiar, vs novel objects.
Sampling method in Pepperberg
Opportunity
What did Alex the parrot know prior to the Pepperberg study?
80 different objects of various shapes, colours and materials.
Vocal labels for:
- Five colours: green, rose, blue, yellow, grey
- Various shapes (2, 3, 4, 5 cornered shapes)
- Four materials - wood, hide, paper, cork
What were Alex the parrot’s living conditions like? (3)
- Was allowed free in the Lab, and able to go elsewhere with vocal request for 8 hours per day
- Slept in a wire cage during sleep hours
- food and water available at all times - eg. standard seed mix. Fresh fruit, vegetables etc. were available on vocal request
What type of study and experimental design was used for Pepperberg?
Case study
(therefore repeated measures)
What were the 3 possible correct response categories Alex could answer in the Pepperberg study?
- Matter (mah mah)
- Colour
- Shape
What were the two potential questions Alex could be askes that are relevant to the Pepperberg study procedure?
- What’s same?
- What’s Different?
What was Alex’s reward for answering a question correctly?
- Given the objects, or was allowed to vocalise a request for something different (positive reinforcement)
What was Alex’s punishment for answering a question incorrectly?
- Experimenter shouts “No!” (Positive punishment)
- Experimenter takes objects out of sight (negative punishment)
What were signs that Alex was getting bored in the Pepperberg study?
- Stops answering questions
- Start preening
- Other vocal requests (eg. “I wanna go X”)
How many times a week did training take place for Alex the Parrot in the Pepperberg study?
2 - 4 times per week
How long did training procedures last for Alex in the Pepperberg study?
5 minutes to 1 hour
Explain what was used in the general training procedure in the Pepperberg study
- Model/rival approach
How was the same/different training conducted in the Pepperberg study?
- With the model/rival approach
Two objects presented, and “trainer” asks ‘what’s same?’ or ‘what’s different?’
If incorrect: “No!” and object taken away
If correct: “good parrot” and given objects
What category was initially not included in training procedures in Pepperberg, and why?
Matter, because Alex had not yet learnt how to vocalise the label.
What objects were used in the same/different training procedures in Pepperberg?
Colours: Red, green, blue
Shapes: triangle, square
Matter: Rawhide, wood
What was the criteria to be met in training, before testing procedures could begin in the Pepperberg study?
- Clear vocalisation of labels, rather than accuracy of understanding - as this was the thing actually being tested for
- Once 90% agreement of “mah mah” from experimenters, testing could begin
How often did testing procedures take place in the Pepperberg study?
1 to 4 times per week
How was researcher bias minimised in the Pepperberg study?
- Pepperberg (principal trainer) was to sit facing away in the corner of the room. Her role was to ensure inter-rater reliability for Alex’s vocalisations of his answers. She also made a list for possible objects that could then be chosen by the secondary trainer.
- A secondary trainer organised the order, and asked Alex the questions
Rewards and Punishment for Alex during testing procedures in the Pepperberg study
- Same as in model/rival procedures
Correct: “good parrot”, given the objects
Incorrect: “No!” (+ turn of the head), objects taken out of sight
Objects used for the tests on familiar objects in the Pepperberg study
- Similar to those used in training
- Including one additional colour, shape and material found in the lab
- Also used previously novel objects used in novel objects testing that were now familiar.
Explain the Novel objects trials in the Pepperberg study
- At least one, often both objects were completely unfamiliar to Alex
- Completely unfamiliar objects were shelved in Alex’s view for a couple days prior to presenting them, as to avoid a fear response. - These specific objects were never the exact ones used
Explain the Probes test in the Pepperberg study
- Done randomly throughout testing
- Presented two objects, and asked a question for which there would be two possible correct category answers.
What was the reason for the Probes testing in the Pepperberg study?
- to ensure Alex was paying attention to what was being asked, and not instantly assuming the answer by looking at the objects
How long did it take Alex to learn “colour” and “shape” in the Pepperberg study
4 months
How long did it take Alex to learn “matter” in the Pepperberg study
9 months
Pepperberg: results on familiar objects, all trials
99/129 - 76.6%
Pepperberg: Results on familiar objects, first trials
69/99 - 69.7%
Pepperberg: Results for objects no longer novel, all trials
13/17 - 76.5%
Pepperberg: Results for objects no longer novel, first trials
10/13 - 76.9%
Pepperberg: Results for novel objects, all trials
96/113 - 85%
Pepperberg: Results for novel objects, first trials
79/96 - 82.3%
Pepperberg: Results for Probes, all trials
55/61 - 90.2%
Pepperberg: Results for Probes, first trials
49/55 - 89.1%
What is the explanation for more accuracy seen in the novel objects trials vs the tests on familiar objects in the Pepperberg study?
Because Alex received the object for getting the answer correct, his incentive may have bee higher to get questions right with unfamiliar objects, as they are more new and interesting to him.
What is the conclusion of the Pepperberg study?
- At least 1 avian subject (an African Grey Parrot) can use symbolic labels to understand the concept of same/different
Is the Pepperberg study on the nature or nurture side of the debate?
Nurture: Alex was taught symbolic understanding by humans through rewards
Generalisability - Pepperberg
Negative:
- only 1 parrot
- raised in a lab, can’t even generalise to other parrots
Reliability - Pepperberg
Positive:
- Standardised procedures - M/r techniques, equal amounts of same and different questions
- Inter-observer reliability for the “mah mah” label - 90%
Application - Pepperberg (3)
model/rival approach:
- can teach animals correct ways to behave in different environments eg. an injured wild that needs to be kept in a zoo
- Using model/rival approach to educate children
- More humane treatment of animals, specifically birds, as we know they can comprehend more than we thought.
Validity - Pepperberg
Positive:
- probes trials and their purpose
- Principal trainer facing away - helped researcher bias
- Secondary trainer asking questions, and making the order - helped researcher bias
- 33% chance of answering correctly if guessed - better than 50%
- Quantitative data allows comparison between familiar and novel objects
- Comparisons between familiar and novel objects shows Alex could apply the same/different concept to a wider range of items
Ethics - Pepperberg
Positive:
- housing (allowed freedom and request)
- rewards (given)
- Numbers (case study - one used)
- Appropriate species & strain (lab parrot)
Negative
- African Grey Parrots are social animals, therefore being kept alone wasn’t ideal
- AGP are such intelligent animals, therefore may have been unethical to keep Alex in an artificial environment.
