Abstract
In two experiments, we developed a new methodology for studying complex stimulus control by spatial sequences of letters generated by artificial grammars. An artificial grammar is a system of rules that defines which letter sequences or strings are “grammatical.” In Experiment 1, pigeons learned to respond differently to strings conforming to a grammar versus strings that were nongrammatical distortions. Several different criteria all suggested that performance was controlled both by some short chunks of strings shared between reinforced training strings and novel transfer strings and by more complex sequential regularities. In Experiment 2, pigeons quickly and accurately learned to respond differently to strings conforming to one or the other of two different artificial grammars. As in Experiment 1, performance was controlled both by some short chunks and by more complex sequential regularities. The results are interpreted in terms of family resemblance and pose new goals for theories of complex stimulus control.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Blough, D. S. (1984). Form recognition in pigeons. In H. L. Roitblat, T. G. Bever, & H. S. Terrace (Eds.), Animal cognition (pp. 277–289). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Chomsky, N., & Miller, G. A. (1958). Finite-state languages. Information & Control, 1, 91–112.
Dienes, J. A., Broadbent, D., & Berry, D. (1991). Implicit and explicit knowledge bases in artificial grammar learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 17, 875–887.
Emery, N. J., & Clayton, N. S. (2004). The mentality of crows: Convergent evolution of intelligence in corvids and apes. Science, 306, 1903–1907.
Fitch, W. T., Hauser, M. D., & Chomsky, N. (2005). The evolution of the language facility: Clarifications and implications. Cognition, 97, 179–210.
Froehlich, A. L., Herbranson, W. T., Loper, J. D., Wood, D. M., & Shimp, C. P. (2004). Anticipating by pigeons depends on local statistical information in a serial response time task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 31–45.
Gardner, R. A., & Gardner, B. T. (1978). Comparative psychology and language acquisition. In K. Salzinger & F. L. Denmark (Eds.), Psychology: The state of the art (Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, Vol. 309, pp. 37–76). New York: New York Academy of Sciences.
Gentner, T. Q., Fenn, K. M., Margoliash, D., & Nusbaum, H. C. (2006). Recursive syntactic pattern learning by songbirds. Nature, 440, 1204–1207.
Gomez, R. L., & Gerken, L. A. (1999). Artificial grammar learning by one-year-olds leads to specific and abstract knowledge. Cognition, 70, 109–135.
Gomez, R. L., & Lakusta, L. (2004). A first step in form-based category abstraction by 12-month-old infants. Developmental Science, 7, 567–580.
Greenfield, P. M. (1991). Language, tools, and the brain: The ontogeny and phylogeny of hierarchically organized sequential behavior. Behavioral & Brain Sciences, 14, 531–551.
Hauser, M. D., Chomsky, N., & Fitch, W. T. (2002). The faculty of language: What is it, who has it, and how did it evolve? Science, 298, 1569–1579.
Hauser, M. D., Newport, E. L., & Aslin, R. N. (2001). Segmentation of the speech stream in a nonhuman primate: Statistical learning in cotton-top tamarins. Cognition, 78, 53–64.
Herbranson, W. T. (2000). Cognitive dissociation of memory systems: Implicit and explicit memory in pigeons (Columba livia). Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Utah.
Herbranson, W. T., & Shimp, C. P. (2003). “Artificial grammar learning” in pigeons: A preliminary analysis. Learning & Behavior, 31, 98–106.
Herrnstein, R. J., Loveland, D. H., & Cable, C. (1976). Natural concepts in pigeons. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 2, 285–302.
Knowlton, B. J., & Squire, L. R. (1996). Artificial grammar learning depends on implicit acquisition of both abstract and exemplarspecific information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 22, 169–181.
Krasnegor, N. A., Lyon, O. R., & Goldman-Rakic, P. S. (1997). Development of the prefrontal cortex: Evolution, neurobiology, and behavior. Baltimore: Brookes.
Lieberman, P. (2002). On the nature and evolution of the neural bases of human language. In C. Ruff (Ed.), Yearbook of physical anthropology (pp. 36–62). New York: Wiley-Liss.
Loidolt, M., Aust, U., Meran, I., & Huber, L. (2003). Pigeons use item-specific and category-level information in the identification and categorization of human faces. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 29, 261–276.
McAndrews, M. P., & Moscovitch, M. (1985). Rule-based and exemplar-based classification in artificial grammar learning. Memory & Cognition, 13, 469–475.
Meulemans, T., & Van der Linden, M. (1997). Associative chunk strength in artificial grammar learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 23, 1007–1028.
Perruchet, P., & Pacteau, C. (1990). Synthetic grammar learning: Implicit rule abstraction or explicit fragmentary knowledge? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 119, 264–275.
Premack, D. (1976). Intelligence in ape and man. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Reber, A. S. (1967). Implicit learning of artificial grammars. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 6, 855–863.
Reber, A. S. (1969). Transfer of syntactic structure in synthetic languages. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 81, 115–119.
Reber, A. S., & Lewis, S. (1977). Implicit learning: An analysis of the form and structure of a body of tacit knowledge. Cognition, 5, 333–361.
Rosch, E. (1978). Principles of categorization. In E. Rosch & B. B. Lloyd (Eds.), Cognition and categorization (pp. 27–48). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Rosnow, R. L., & Rosenthal, R. (2003). Effect sizes for experimental psychologists. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 57, 221–237.
Rumbaugh, D. M., & Washburn, D. A. (2003). Intelligence of apes and other rational beings. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Sands, S. F., Lincoln, C. E., & Wright, A. A. (1982). Pictorial similarity judgments and the organization of visual memory in the rhesus monkey. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 111, 369–389.
Servan-Schreiber, E., & Anderson, J. R. (1990). Learning artificial grammars with competitive chunking. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 16, 592–608.
Shimp, C. P., Froehlich, A. L., & Herbranson, W. T. (2007). Information processing in pigeons: Incentive as information. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 121, 73–81.
Vokey, J. R., & Tangen, J. M. (2001, June). Learning an artist’s style: Just what does a pigeon see in a Picasso? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Canadian Society for Brain, Behavior & Cognitive Science, Quebec. Available at people.uleth.ca/~vokey/pdf/WatanabeSimposter.pdf.
Watanabe, S., Sakamoto, J., & Wakita, M. (1995). Pigeons’ discrimination of paintings by Monet and Picasso. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 63, 165–174.
Wittgenstein, L. (1953). Philosophical investigations. New York: Macmillan.
Wright, A. A. (2001). Learning strategies in matching to sample. In R. G. Cook (Ed.), Avian visual cognition [Online]. Available at www.pigeon.psy.tufts.edu/avc/wright.
Wright, A. A., Cook, R. G., Rivera, J. J., Sands, S. F., & Delius, J. D. (1988). Concept learning by pigeons: Matching to sample with trial-unique video picture stimuli. Learning & Behavior, 16, 436–444.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This research was supported by a grant from the University of Utah Research Committee and by an NRSA predoctoral fellowship. Some of the results are from the first author’s dissertation, submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a doctoral degree from the Department of Psychology, University of Utah (Herbranson, 2000). We thank Thane Fremouw, who graciously volunteered to help run birds and directed our attention to important relevant literature and who, along with Alyson Froehlich, provided comments on an earlier draft.
Note—This article was accepted by the previous editorial team, when Shepard Siegel was Editor.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Herbranson, W.T., Shimp, C.P. Artificial grammar learning in pigeons. Learning & Behavior 36, 116–137 (2008). https://doi.org/10.3758/LB.36.2.116
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/LB.36.2.116