PSY2002 SEMESTER 1 - WEEK 9 Flashcards
summarise cognition regarding basis of behaviour, type of goal, systems, abilities
basis of intelligent behaviour, overriding reflexive/habitual response to favour complex, long-term goal, control sensory, memory, motor system
core vs higher order cog abilities, effort/attention required with no autopilot, top-down mental process
name core cog abilities
IC, WM, CF
name some higher order cognitive abilities
object permanence, self recognition, tool use/causal reasoning, ToM, mental time travel
summarise Scala Naturae/ladder of being
instinct think certain animal more intelligent than others in hierarchical ‘degree of perfection’ related to how close they’re related to us (gorilla most intelligent, then reptiles, then fish)
summarise Bloch (2019) fish sample delay for scala naturae
got them to learn a pattern to get rewards and believed this showed fish have WM, found frogs can do learned inhibition (can inhibit instinctual response)
what is found in lizards, and birds
lizard= IC
crows, ravens= WM
why are human seen as dominant?
cortex, PFC larger than other mammal, associated with core cognition, EF
what is cortex
laminated (layered) multiple layers with different neurons doing different role, allowing complex higher order cognition
compare birds to humans regarding cortex
no neocortex/laminated cortex but can do similar tasks to humans
= debate about why cortex is viewed as special
summarise WM
short-term representation of items held in consciousness and can be manipulated. key neural structure is in PFC
not passive
what can action potentials (spike trains) measure, tell us
can measure electrical activity of extracellular space around neuron and amount of firing to tell us how much processing taking place in neurons
summarise monkey delay activity (Niki, 1974) finding a neural correlate between neuronal activity and WM- method
delayed response task; 2 lights, 2 buttons. 1/2 cue lights illuminated for 1s on left/right
cue illumination off for 2-3s (delay period)
monkey pick between l/r button
summarise monkey delay activity (Niki, 1974) finding a neural correlate between neuronal activity and WM- results
performed well
measured PFC- found spike trains (neuron firing) with initial spike at presentation of cues, sustained spike trains during delay (delay activity- persistent firing rate, bridging gap between stimulus presentation and choice being made)
then see sharp increase/sustained increase in firing rate, reflecting WM (monkey hold onto info, makes decisions)
describe what delay period tasks find regarding WM in monkeys (mention firing rates, spike trains)
delay activity is persistent firing rate bridging gap between stimulus and choice
monkey holds onto info during delay period and then see sharp increase then sustained increase in firing rate, reflecting WM processing (hold onto info, make decision)
less activity = monkey no longer needing info, its made its decision
give strength of delay activity tasks in monkeys
high validity, seen in multiple studies
outline role of dopamine in classical conditioning, found with neuron fires
providing reward shows sustained spike activity of neuonrs firing dopamine
but if provide with CS, see actual dopaminergic responses tied to CS not reward (anticipation) and actual reward shows decreased activity
how can we tell if dopaminergic spike activity reflects WM
dopamine is neuromodular, respond to sensory stimuli which predicts future reward
so need to be mindful that dopamine tied into reward circuitry, importance of anticipation as well
what do critics suggest about studies using monkeys to find neural basis for WM
monkey isn’t manipulating, instead just holding onto info so not really studying their WM
what parts of brain do bird not have
no neocortex but still has subcortical structures like basal ganglia
because bird brain appear more primitive, what is it believed they are unable to do
reason, however just because brain different to human, doesn’t mean cannot do what we do
what part of bird brain is believed similar to human cortex
nidopallium caudolaterale (NCL)
what is NCL (structure and function)
grey and white matter covering cerebrum
higher order association area, many dopaminergic innervation and receive afferent from secondary/tertiary sensory areas of all modality
project to most of somatic/limbic striatum, motor output structures
organised in nuclei
what similarities between NCL and PFC
similar connections, with amygdala, nucleus accumbens, visceral structures
NCL in WM has evidence from delay activites, what are these
single-cell studies in pigeons
trained to learn that remembering stimuli necessary to receive reward
reflected in NCL neuron in memory phases, suppressed when remembering stimulus was not needed
what insight-related cognitions can bird show?
object permanence, ToM, tool use
what birds is object permanence seen in
awareness object exist even if out of sight
corvids (ie, magpie)
give example of how ToM shown in birds
attribute own mental state and possible future behaviours to another
ravens show this for food catching behaviours
outline how birds show mental time travel
recollecting past episode, anticipating future needs and motivating states
corvid store foods, recovers them, plan breakfast, catch food at places they previously learnt to be hungry in
outline how birds show tool use, and causal reasoning
selecting, manipulating objects in environment to utilise them in to achieve goal
New Caldeonian Crow cut tool out of leaves, makes hook, lateralisation (start cutting tools from left side), meta-tool use (using 1 tool on another)
define analogue
same/similar function even if structures different
to test if NCL is functionally analogue to PFC, can use single unit recordings on WM tasks. apply using this on pigeons (Rose & Colombo), using auditoy cues, intervals, delay tasks -method
intertrial interval then sample (3 possible areas where stimulus can occur, diff stim each time)
auditory cue= tells pigeon to remember/forget
a. told to remember, 3s delay, make choice (overcome issue from Niki as no reward anticipation), select between 2 diff stim and have to remember what stim was, not just where it is
b. have to forget
to test if NCL is functionally analogue to PFC, can use single unit recordings on WM tasks. apply using this on pigeons (Rose & Colombo), using auditoy cues, intervals, delay tasks -results from remember and forgetting conditions, regarding neuronal firing rates
in remember condition, sustained activity of increased firing rates, consisten from cue to end of delay (bridges gap between S-R, is likely to be reflecting WM)
forgetting condition: see activity stop
why do we need to be careful when interpreting studies on WM regarding delay activity and neuron responding
abolished delay activity is linked to reward prediction so activity we see may simply be pigeon preparing the motor response to peck
neurons able to change firing rate responding to forget (as no reward)
discern between confounds of WM and reward prediction
what do delayed match-to-sample tasks entale, how do these solve methodology issues
disentangle WM from motor preparation as stimuli location randomly change
chance of reward equal for all match item, and randomised meaning reward expectation negated
pre-sample break to reset neuronal activity, have to encode memory for picture, delay, then pick 1/4 images for answer
may/may not receive reward
what is found for crows on delayed match-to-sample tasks
very high performance
when studying if differences in firing rates of different neuronal populations, like for NCL what is found
sample selective neurons, responding different to each of 4 images, suggesting type of stimuli impact WM encoding
cannot be due to preparation of motor response showing discrimination between items, extra level of processing, provide evidence
in conclusion, summarise relationship between NCL with WM, including neural bases
delay activity in NCL bridge time gap between stim, choice (evidence for neural basis of WM)
neural circuit doesn’t necessarily need neocortex
both NCL, PFC are functionally analogue
cannot train bees to do a WM task, what can be done instead
time how long take bee fly point A-B, make linear function, present bee with stimuli along the linear function
(pattern)
by changing distance between sample point and where makes decision can know how long they have to hold onto info for
at end of tunnel have to decide which to enter
on bee WM tasks, what was found, including WM duration
high performance in short delay task
varying distance varied difficulty
WM up to 6.5seconds
how can bee WM study task be made a bit harder
put in some incorrect patterns before/after sample stimulus, with correct pattern always present at same distances from tunnel entrance
results show bee ignores patter really well
give advantages of studying cognitive functions in non-human animals
direct recordings AP (single cell recordings) which are very invasive
high spatial, temporal accuracy - not possible from EEG, fMRI
insight into cognitive nature, analogue of cognitions for different species
give disadvantages of studying cognitive functions in non-human animals
it is invasive
cannot self-report, need training on task
task doesn’t reflect typical behavour
hard to design tasks not including any confound (reward anticipation, motor prep, STM vs WM)
