Access

You are not currently logged in.

Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:

login

Log in to your personal account or through your institution.

If You Use a Screen Reader

This content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.

Automatic Imitation in Budgerigars

Rosetta Mui, Mark Haselgrove, John Pearce and Cecilia Heyes
Proceedings: Biological Sciences
Vol. 275, No. 1651 (Nov. 22, 2008), pp. 2547-2553
Published by: Royal Society
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25249842
Page Count: 7
  • Read Online (Free)
  • Cite this Item
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Automatic Imitation in Budgerigars
Preview not available

Abstract

A fully automated procedure, involving computer-controlled stimulus presentation and computer-recorded response measurement, was used for the first time to study imitation in non-human animals. After preliminary training to peck and step on a manipulandum, budgerigars were given a discrimination task in which they were rewarded with food for pecking during observation of pecking and for stepping during observation of stepping (Compatible group), or for pecking while observing stepping and for stepping while observing pecking (Incompatible group). The Incompatible group, which had to counter-imitate for food reward, showed weaker discrimination performance than the Compatible group. This suggests that, like humans, budgerigars are subject to 'automatic imitation'; they cannot inhibit online the tendency to imitate pecking and/or stepping, even when imitation of these behaviours interferes with the performance of an ongoing task. The difference between the two groups persisted over 10 test sessions, but the Incompatible group eventually acquired the discrimination, making more counter-imitative than imitative responses in the final sessions. These results are consistent with the associative sequence learning model, which suggests that, across species, the development of imitation and the mirror system depends on sensorimotor experience and phylogenetically ancient mechanisms of associative learning.

Page Thumbnails

  • Thumbnail: Page 
2547
    2547
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2548
    2548
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2549
    2549
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2550
    2550
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2551
    2551
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2552
    2552
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2553
    2553