You are not currently logged in.
Access JSTOR through your library or other institution:
If You Use a Screen ReaderThis 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
You can always find the topics here!Topics: Observational learning, Pecking order, Birds, Associative learning, Observational research, Animals, Imitation foods, Discrimination learning, Learning, Social protests
Were these topics helpful?See somethings inaccurate? Let us know!
Select the topics that are inaccurate.
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.
Preview not available
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.
Proceedings: Biological Sciences © 2008 Royal Society