Shepard's universal law supported by honeybees in spatial generalization

Psychological Science

Volumn 11, Issue 5, 2000, Pages 403-408

  Cheng, Ken ^a  

^a MACQUARIE UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADAPTATION; ANIMAL; ARTICLE; BEE; COGNITION; EVOLUTION; LOCOMOTION; PSYCHOLOGICAL MODEL;

ADAPTATION, PHYSIOLOGICAL; ANIMALS; BEES; COGNITION; EVOLUTION; LOCOMOTION; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL;

EID: 0034279621     PISSN: 09567976     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/1467-9280.00278     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Bitterman, M.E. (1996). Comparative analysis of learning in honeybees. Animal Learning & Behavior, 24, 123-141.
2. Capaldi, E.A., Robinson, G.E., & Fahrbach, S.E. (1999). Neuroethology of spatial learning: The birds and the bees. Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 651-682.
3. Cartwright, B.A., & Collett, T.S. (1982). How honeybees use landmarks to guide their return to a food source. Nature, 295, 560-564.
4. Cartwright, B.A., & Collett, T.S. (1983). Landmark learning in bees. Journal of Comparative Physiology A, 151, 521-543.
5. Cheng, K. (1999). Spatial generalization in honeybees confirms Shepard's law. Behavioural Processes, 44, 309-316.
6. Cheng, K. (2000). How honeybees find a place: Lessons from a simple mind. Animal Learning & Behavior, 28, 1-15.
7. Cheng, K., Spetch, M.L., & Johnston, M. (1997). Spatial peak shift and generalization in pigeons. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 23, 469-481.
8. Collett, T.S., & Zeil, J. (1998). Places and landmarks: An arthropod perspective. In S. Healy (Ed.), Spatial representation in animals (pp. 18-53). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
9. Ennis, D.M. (1988). Confusable and discriminable stimuli: Comment on Nosofsky (1986) and Shepard (1986). Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 117, 408-411.
10. Gluck, M.A. (1991). Stimulus generalization and representation in adaptive network models of category learning. Psychological Science, 2, 50-55.
11. Lehrer, M., Srinivasan, M.V., Zhang, S.W., & Horridge, G.A. (1988). Motion cues provide the bee's visual world with a third dimension. Nature, 332, 356-357.
12. Nosofsky, R.M. (1986). Attention, similarity and the identification-categorization relationship. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 115, 39-57.
13. Nosofsky, R.M. (1988). On exemplar-based exemplar representations: Reply to Ennis (1988). Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 117, 412-414.
14. Reid, A.K., & Staddon, J.E.R. (1998). A dynamic route finder for the cognitive map. Psychological Review, 105, 585-601.
15. Shepard, R.N. (1958a). Stimulus and response generalization: Deduction of the generalization gradient from a trace model. Psychological Review, 65, 242-256.
16. Shepard, R.N. (1958b). Stimulus and response generalization: Tests of a model relating generalization to distance in psychological space. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 55, 509-523.
17. Shepard, R.N. (1965). Approximation to uniform gradients of generalization by monotone transformations of scale. In D.I. Mostofsky (Ed.), Stimulus generalization (pp. 94-110). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
18. Shepard, R.N. (1986). Discrimination and generalization in identification and classification: Comment on Nosofsky. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 115, 58-61.
19. Shepard, R.N. (1987). Toward a universal law of generalization for psychological science. Science, 237, 1317-1323.
20. Shepard, R.N. (1988). Time and distance in generalization and discrimination: Reply to Ennis (1988). Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 117, 415-416.