Acquisition of the same/different concept by an African grey parrot: learning with respect to categories of color, shape, and material DR. IRENE PEPPERBERG(PARROT LEARNING)-CORE STUDY 3 Background Psychologists believe only human possess true language skills alongside the ability to show range of cognitive skills. One cognitive skill that had been reported as a specific concept seen in humans is the comprehension of “same” or “different” Psychologist Premack research on pigeons showed that pigeons may understand “same” but not ”different” but no other research had attempted to investigate this cognitive skill. Cont. . . Identifying items as the same or different requires a particular set of cognitive skills. Firstly, the animal must recognize the category being shared(for example, that both in green color). From this single attribute they must also realize that this sameness can be applied to other novel items. This requires a skill known as symbolic representation, meaning the concept of same and different learned from one experience can be applied to an entirely new and different situation. Cont. . . Previous research had only asked non-humans to state same or different without category label, or just indicate whether the object is same or different, simply press a lever to indicate whether same or different and recognize pairs that were 100% same or different. Pepperberg reported that Alex, an African grey parrot can categories objects(color, shape, material), count up to six and use functional phrases This study was designed to test the cognitive skills of same/different comprehension in African grey parrot. Part of the process involved in the study used social learning process & operant conditioning Aims 1. The aim is to replicate the findings of linguistic and cognitive skills that had been previously achieved with chimps in a grey parrot. 2. To investigate if an avian object could use vocal label to demonstrate symbolic comprehension of the concepts of same and different. Methodology Research Method: Experimental Case Study Sampling technique & Participants: opportunity sampling –an African grey parrot Data Collection: Quantitative Data Analysis: Measure of central tendency-Mean Variables IV: whether the object is familiar or novel DV: whether the parrot responds correctly to the questions about ”what’s same” & “what’s different” About Alex. . . Alex had been involved in prior research since 1977 on communication and cognition for around 10 years. He had a free access to all parts of the laboratory. Alex had considerable vocabulary as a result of his previous experience as a research subject. He could name colors(red, green, yellow, blue & grey) several shapes(triangle, square), different kinds of material (wood, cork, paper) & metallic objects(key & chain) During his sleeping hours he was placed in a cage with water and standard seed mix, fruits, nuts, vegetables & toys to play with. Alex died in 2007 of natural cause at the age of 31 Design Alex was presented with two objects that could be differentiated based on three categories: color, shape, material He would then be asked either what’s same or what’s different. A correct response only be recorded if Alex vocalized the appropriate category and not the specific color, shape or material. Cont. . . Alex had to go through four processes to get a correct response: 1. Attend to multiple features of two different objects 2. From the vocal question determine whether the response is based on sameness or difference 3. Work out what is same or different 4. Vocally produce a category response Cont. . . Alex could understand abstract categories. He could respond correctly to question such as “what color” & “what Shape” He could explain why something is same or different. Alex was tested on similar and novel objects that were not in his labelling repertoire(a stock of skills that individual habitually uses) General Training The primary technique used in Alex learning was called model/rival technique based on principles of social learning. One of the human acts as a trainer while the second human answered question about objects, giving praise reward(the object itself) for correct response and disapproval for incorrect answer. The second human was acting as a model for alex response but also as rival for the trainers attention. The role of model/rival & trainer were frequently reversed and alex was given the opportunity to participate in these sessions. To keep alex motivation high he would be rewarded with item of his choice Training( same/different) A trainer would hold up two objects in front of the model/rival & simply ask what’s same or what’s different then the roles were reversed. Both types of question and the training objects were mixed within each session of training. The initial training contrasted just the categories of color, shape, matter. Sessions occurred two to four times per week and lasted from five min to one hour. To prevent boredom alex was also trained on number concept, new labels for other objects, recognition of photographs and object permanence. Experimental Procedure After training trials were carried out by secondary trainers who had never trained alex on same or different labelling. This was used to reduce any effect of cuing from the original trainer(Pepperberg). On a previous day the principal trainer would list all possible objects that could be used for testing. A student who was not involved in any training of Alex would then choose from the same or different pairs and then randomly order the questions. A secondary trainer would present alex with the object and then ask a question what’s same or what’s different. Cont. . . The principal trainer was present during the times of the trial with her back to alex. she never knew what was being presented to alex. However, she would repeat out loud what she thought alex had said. If alex gave a correct response he was rewarded(operant conditioning/positive reinforcement) if not then the same object was presented again with the same question asked until the correct response was given. The same materials were never presented again during the test so there was a single first trial response. Cont. . . To prevent boredom and expectation cuing a range of different question, similar pairings of familiar objects used in training and novel object pairings were presented to alex during trials. Alex was never tested exclusively on same or different in one session and was never tested successively in one session with the same question Testing took place over 26 months The training for alex to acquire color and shape labels took four months and matter took nine months. Cont. . . Objects and pairing used for experimental trials were both similar to training process and novel. Any completely new objects was within alex’s environment for several days prior to being used so that alex got used to at least seeing the object to reduce any fear response he may show. Pepperberg also used probes in testing phase. Alex was asked questions where the correct category label could be two of the three labels. E.g. he may have been shown a green wooden triangle and a yellow wooden trainable and asked what’s same? Data Calculation & Results Percentage success rate on trials was measured for familiar and novel objects by dividing the number of correct identification by the total number of presentations(Mean) 1. Familiar Objects: Alex scored 78%correct responses overall and 70% on first trial only performance 2. Novel Objects: Alex scored 85%correct responses overall and 82% on first trials. 3. Probes: Alex scored 90% correct responses overall and 89% on first trials. Conclusion The data indicates that avian subject can show symbolic comprehension of the concept of same/different. His scores on tests were above chance suggesting he understood what the questions were asking. This was shown via the probe questioning. It would therefore appear that symbolic representation in the case of same and different is not exclusive to primates Evaluation- Strengths 1. The research involved collecting quantitative data in the form of correct responses to the same/different questions. 2. Ethical guidelines followed: Number, housing, procedure, rewards, protection from distress 3. Advantages of using animal: relatively easy and cheap to care for. Alex had been involved in training for other studies and was known to respond well to training in vocabulary exercise. The study was conducted over a number of years which would have been difficult to achieve with human participant. Cont. . . Lab experiments have high levels of standardization and so can be replicated to test for reliability. the study had strandardized materials & tests. The trials were recorded so they can be rechecked for accuracy Case study: detailed in depth information regarding cognitive abilities of the parrot. Led to new discovery that animals also have the ability of symbolic comprehension. Lab experiments have high levels of control that result in high internal validity such as using secondary trainer during trials, testing Alex on novel objects and on probes, using video recording for trials, testing was delayed for the purpose of accuracy because alex had not learned to say matter(he pronounced mah mah). This shows that it was IV effecting DV. Alex knew what he was talking about, his response was not due to practice effect or rote learning and researcher bias was also eleminated. Weaknesses 1. Lab experiment so low ecological validity and tasks lack mundane realism.(external validity) 2. Only alex was used in the study so this could make generalizability difficult(population Validity). Alex can be different from other African grey parrots. If this is the case, Alex may be unique and have skills that do not represent a wider population of African grey parrots. 3. Unethical because caging a bird and keeping it in an artificial environment and engaging it in artificial tasks. 4. Practical imitations to working with animals. The parrot is unable to explain its reasoning which can cause interpretation bias. Nature Vs Nurture Nature - Nurture Theories of operant conditioning and social learning demonstrate Alex nurture based learning. Application to everyday life Using techniques of operant conditioning(reinforcement) and social learning(modelling) animals could be trained ** read book for detailed evaluation Exam Style Questions 1. Discuss two strengths and two weaknesses of Pepperberg (parrot learning) study. One of the points should include use of animals in research. (10) 2. Alex’s primary trainer was present in each trial. However, they did not look at the parrot and were asked to repeat his response. Explain why Pepperberg was given this role.(4) 3. How was dependent variable operationalized in Pepperberg study.(2) 4. Describe one way that nurture is illustrated in Pepperberg’s study.(4) 5. Describe the techniques used in Alex training. (4)