Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

March 3 rd, 2009  Introduction to Tool Use and Causal Understanding  What is learned - associative learning of causal understanding? 3 Case Studies:

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "March 3 rd, 2009  Introduction to Tool Use and Causal Understanding  What is learned - associative learning of causal understanding? 3 Case Studies:"— Presentation transcript:

1

2 March 3 rd, 2009

3  Introduction to Tool Use and Causal Understanding  What is learned - associative learning of causal understanding? 3 Case Studies: Tool Selection Gravity Tool Manufacture  How are causal relations learned?

4

5 Tool Use

6  Insight & Creativity Using the environment in novel ways to achieve goals  Planning & Forethought Thinking ahead Responding to stimuli that aren’t in sight  Causal Understanding “Folk Physics” Understanding something about how the world works Mediating forces

7  What is learned? Associative vs. Causal EventOutcome Associative learning: Predict the outcome – what is going to happen next? Causal understanding: WHY and HOW does the outcome occur?

8  What is learned? Associative vs. Causal Associative: Yellow ball moves after contact with blue ball Causal: Mediating forces – “force” imparted by blue ball is blocked by the barrier

9  Mediating forces: Different levels of complexity  Visible factors  Invisible factors  Psychological factors  Explanatory Attitude

10

11  Can non-human animals recognize the functional properties of tools? Hauser and colleagues – cottontop tamarins

12  Hauser and colleagues – cottontop tamarins

13  Varied colour, texture, shape and size Colour & texture are not ‘functional’ changes Shape & size could be ‘functional’ changes  All canes set in the correct spatial arrangement

14  Monkeys preferred the non-functional changes  Sensitive to changes in potential functionality

15  Similar results found with capuchins Fujita, Kuroshima & Asai, 2003  Included transfer tests in which an obstacle or a trap was on ‘drag path’ Capuchins failed on these transfers  Understand spatial relationship between tool and food, but not tool, food and environment

16  New Caledonian crows  Select tools of appropriate length in sight and out of sight

17 Betty & Abel In sight:Out of sight (Abel only) -Two strategies: -Match distance or -Choose longest -What if length was un-usable? -Abstract representation (keep representation of tool and intended goal in mind)

18

19

20  Trap in the middle of the tube  Learned the task: 1 out of 4 capuchins 2 out of 5 chimps  Transfer tests showed that capuchins used a distance based rule

21  Chimps didn’t use distance based rule  Associative rule still possible Insert stick on side of trap

22  Failure to adjust behaviour on inverted tests But there’s no penalty for not adjusting! Human adults don’t adjust either Instructional problem?  Too many factors? Tool, food and environment Adjusted task to remove tool use

23  Allows subjects to pull or push Prefer to pull  Distance and trap rules are not available

24  New Caledonian crows  Similar transfer tests: 3/6 solved the transfers plus a trap-table task

25

26  In the wild, elephants commonly use branches to repel flies  Too long or too bushy branches presented to captive elephants

27

28  In the wild, tear pandanus leaves  Barbed edges of leaf can be used to “fish” for insects in dead wood  “cultural variation” in tool manufacture  Naive birds can create pandanus tools without teaching

29  In the lab: http://users.ox.ac.uk/~kgroup/tools/movies.sht ml http://users.ox.ac.uk/~kgroup/tools/movies.sht ml  Always inserted straight wire first  Insightful?

30

31

32  Blaisdell, Sawa, Leising & Waldmann, 2006  Test: Intervene-Tone or Observe-Tone Common CauseCausal Chain Light Tone Light FoodLight ToneLight Food

33 Rats  Causal explanation: If Tone just occurs, maybe Light came on first and was ‘missed’  Check for food! If I caused the Tone to occur, Light didn’t happen  don’t check for food  Associative explanation: If there is an association between the tone & food, shouldn’t matter whether you caused it or not  check for food at same rate.  Chain  always check

34  Rats respond in accordance with causal reasoning, not associative processes

35  Causal Markov condition During common-cause condition, tone and light should be causally independent But, rats receive only tone or food following the light – they are NOT independent of each other  Thus, does not strictly follow causal Bayes net

36  Criticism: Lack of evidence could be based on inability to properly instruct animals http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZmx0jml1jk http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pIAoJsS9Ix8& feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pIAoJsS9Ix8& feature=related


Download ppt "March 3 rd, 2009  Introduction to Tool Use and Causal Understanding  What is learned - associative learning of causal understanding? 3 Case Studies:"

Similar presentations


Ads by Google