The name is absent



510


GOUTEUX, THINUS-BLANC, AND VAUCLAIR

Table 2

Data Analysis of the 10 First Trials for Each Experiment and
for the Subjects, Indicating Whether They Searched at the

Correct Location, Made a Rotational Error, or Searched

in the Geometrically Inappropriate Corners

Box

Experiment and subject

C

R

N&F

Experiment 1

Orcas

4

5

1

Krill

5

5

0

Crevet

5

4

1

Average (%)

47

47

6

Experiment 2

Orcas

7

2

1

Krill

7

3

0

Crevet

6

3

1

Average (%)

67

27

6

Experiment 3

Orcas

7

1

2

Krill

6

4

0

Crevet

8

2

0

Average (%)

70

24

6

Experiment 4

Orcas

4

3

3

Krill

6

4

0

Crevet

6

4

0

Average (%)

53

37

10

Experiment 5

Orcas

4

6

0

Krill

5

5

0

Crevet

4

6

0

Average (%)

43

57

0

Experiment 6

Krill

5

3

2

Orcas

4

5

1

Average (%)

45

40

15

Experiment 7

Krill

9

1

0

Crevet

8

1

1

Average (%)

85

10

5

Experiment 8

Krill

7

3

0

Crevet

8

1

1

Average (%)

75

20

5

Note. C = correct; R = rotational; N & F = near and far misses.

Experiment 2

In Experiment 2, we tested monkeys' ability to reorient along
both the geometric shape and nongeometric properties of the
experimental room, by using a local cue (colored wall) as in
Hermer and Spelke's (1994) experiment.

Method

Subjects. The same subjects as in Experiment 1 were used. A delay
of 1 day occurred between Experiment 1 and Experiment 2.

Apparatus. The apparatus was the same as in Experiment 1, but one of
the small walls was completely covered by a blue panel (blue-wall condi-
tion). This landmark always occupied the same side with respect to the
rewarded box (see Figure 2).

Procedure. The same procedure as in Experiment 1 was used, but a
control phase was added. The control phase (10 trials at the end of the 50
experimental trials) consisted of making a 180° transfer of the cue (blue
wall) and of the rewarded box. The aim of that "rotation" was to check that
the only information used by the monkeys to get reoriented was the blue
wall in addition to the geometry of the experimental environment. Indeed,
if during the 50 experimental trials, an uncontrolled cue (from inside or
outside the apparatus) served as a landmark and guided the subject to the
reward box, then the rotation of the landmark would have eliminated the
use of such a cue.

Results

Table 3 presents the number of first searches performed by the 3
subjects during the 50 test trials. For each monkey, the data of the
test were subjected to a chi-square one-sample test by which we
compared the observed distribution to the theoretical frequency of
an equal distribution in the geometrically appropriate and geomet-
rically inappropriate above-mentioned categories (i.e., 50% of
chance for each one). These results always reached a statistically
significant level, Orcas,
X2(1, N = 50) = 32.0; Krill, X2(1, N = 50)
= 46.1; Crevet,
X2(1, N = 50) = 46.1; all ps < .001. Another
chi-square one-sample test computed on the data obtained in the
two corners of the observed geometrically appropriate category
compared with an equal frequency of distributions of the searches
to these two corners (i.e., 50% of chance for each one), indicated
that the numbers of visits to Corner C and to Corner R were
statistically different, Orcas, A,2
(1, N = 45) = 18.68, p < .001;
Krill,
X2(1, N = 49) = 9.00, p < .005; Crevet, X2(1, N = 49) =
22.22; p < .001. The monkeys mainly chose the correct corner.

For Experiment 2, the data of each subject during the entire
experimental session (50 trials) are very similar to those observed
during the first 10 trials (see Table 2, Experiment 2). Thus, we can
conclude that no obvious improvement of the monkeys' perfor-
mance takes place during the experimental procedure, logistic
regression: Orcas,
X(1, N = 60) = 0.05; Krill, X2(l, N = 60) _
0.01; Crevet,
X2(1, N = 60) = 4.70; p > .05.

During the virtual rotation control session, all the subjects
reacted in the same way. On average, 84% of their first choices
during the 10 trials were directed to the rewarded box (noted "C";
90% for Subject Orcas, 60% for Subject Krill, and 99% for Subject
Crevet). The geometrically equivalent corner (Corner R) received
an average of 13% of the first visits (0% for Orcas, 30% for Krill,
and 1% for Crevet). Finally, the geometrically inappropriate cor-
ners (noted "N" and "F„) received an average of 3% (0% for
Orcas, 10% for Krill, and 0% for Crevet) of the first visits. This

Table 3

Number of Trials (Out of 50) During Experiment 2 for the
Subjects as a Function of Their Search Location (Correct,
Rotational, Geometrically Inappropriate Corners)

Box

Monkey

C

R

N

F

Orcas

37

8

4

1

Krill

35

14

I

0

Crevet

41

8

0

1

Average (%)

75

20

3.5

1.5

Note. C = correct; R = rotational; N = near misses; F = far misses.



More intriguing information

1. The name is absent
2. A Hybrid Neural Network and Virtual Reality System for Spatial Language Processing
3. FASTER TRAINING IN NONLINEAR ICA USING MISEP
4. EXECUTIVE SUMMARIES
5. Altruism with Social Roots: An Emerging Literature
6. CONSUMER ACCEPTANCE OF GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOODS
7. The name is absent
8. Eigentumsrechtliche Dezentralisierung und institutioneller Wettbewerb
9. The name is absent
10. PEER-REVIEWED FINAL EDITED VERSION OF ARTICLE PRIOR TO PUBLICATION
11. AGRICULTURAL PRODUCERS' WILLINGNESS TO PAY FOR REAL-TIME MESOSCALE WEATHER INFORMATION
12. The name is absent
13. THE ANDEAN PRICE BAND SYSTEM: EFFECTS ON PRICES, PROTECTION AND PRODUCER WELFARE
14. The Macroeconomic Determinants of Volatility in Precious Metals Markets
15. Effects of a Sport Education Intervention on Students’ Motivational Responses in Physical Education
16. Segmentación en la era de la globalización: ¿Cómo encontrar un segmento nuevo de mercado?
17. The Trade Effects of MERCOSUR and The Andean Community on U.S. Cotton Exports to CBI countries
18. The name is absent
19. The Clustering of Financial Services in London*
20. A Rare Presentation of Crohn's Disease