{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

103_25_full - PSYC 103 Winter 2011 Lecture 25 Communication...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–7. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
PSYC 103 Winter 2011 Lecture 25 Communication Final: Friday March 18 th 8AM Monday, March 14 Warren Lecture Hall Room 2005 8-9:20pm
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Different calls elicit different behaviors in receivers
Background image of page 2
Do vervet calls have meaning? Measure habituation/“dishabituation” between different calls that are used in the same context (i.e. different sound - same meaning) Transfer across call types Individual recognition; No transfer
Background image of page 3

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Do vervet calls have meaning? Habituation transfers across calls from different species! Vervets treat starling alarm calls similarly to vervet alarms Show audience effect (like chickens) Suggests an internal representation of the referent Call listed first is “habituation” Second is “control” & “test” Duration of response
Background image of page 4
Human Language and Animal Communication Limited vs unbounded signal sets : Most animals communicate about a limited range of items (food, sex, predators, etc) using a fixed and usually small set signals. Reference and situational freedom: Animal communication often reflects internal states. Other signals are referential , i.e.they are reliably given in the presence of an object and not under other conditions (bees chickens, monkeys). Humans can discuss events or items that have occurred in the past or may occur in the future. This is called situational freedom or displacement . Intentionality: Humans generally use language with the intent of informing (e.g. clarification), by suiting our communication to the audience and modifying it based on whether or not it is having its intended effects. There is no solid evidence that other animals do this.
Background image of page 5

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
6 Development of communication Communication and intention Is animal communication made with the intention of passing on knowledge to the receiver? - If communication is intentional, animals should signal more when near conspecifics: Marler et al (1990) jungle fowl Sherman (1977) ground squirrels Cheney & Seyfarth (1990) vervet monkeys - The audience effect may, however, reflect nothing more than an innate disposition to make calls in the presence of conspecifics. Hostetter, Cantero & Hopkins (2001): -Trainers held out a banana to chimps that was just out of reach -If trainer facing chimp: chimp held out its hand -If trainer had back to chimp: chimp vocalized -A consequence of trial and error learning?
Background image of page 6
Image of page 7
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}