Acoustic and Perceptual Categories of Vocal Elements in the Warble Song of Budgerigars (Melopsittacus undulatus)

Journal of Comparative Psychology

Volumn 125, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 420-430

  Tu, Hsiao Wei ^a   Smith, Edward W ^a   Dooling, Robert J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

Author keywords

Budgerigar; Categorization; Perceptual categories; Warble

Indexed keywords

ACOUSTICS; ANIMAL; ARTICLE; ARTIFICIAL NEURAL NETWORK; CLASSIFICATION; HEARING; HUMAN; MALE; PARAKEET; PERCEPTIVE DISCRIMINATION; PHYSIOLOGY; VOCALIZATION;

ACOUSTICS; ANIMALS; AUDITORY PERCEPTION; DISCRIMINATION (PSYCHOLOGY); HUMANS; MALE; MELOPSITTACUS; NEURAL NETWORKS (COMPUTER); VOCALIZATION, ANIMAL;

EID: 83755172198     PISSN: 07357036     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/a0024396     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Battiti R., Colla A.M. Democracy in neural nets: Voting schemes for classification. Neural Networks 1994, 7:691-707.
2. Brainard M.S., Doupe A.J. What songbirds teach us about learning. Nature 2002, 417:351-358.
3. Brockway B.F. Ethological studies of the budgerigar: Non-reproductive behavior. Behaviour 1964, 22:193-222.
4. Brockway B.F. Ethological studies of the budgerigar: Reproductive behavior. Behaviour 1964, 23:294-324.
5. Brockway B.F. Stimulation of ovarian development and egg laying by male courtship vocalization in budgerigars (Melopsittacus undulatus). Animal Behaviour 1965, 13:575-578.
6. Brockway B.F. Roles of budgerigar vocalization in the integration of breeding behavior. Bird vocalizations 1969, 131-158. Cambridge University Press, London. R.A. Hinde (Ed.).
7. Brown S.D., Dooling R.J., O'Grady K. Perceptual organization of acoustic stimuli by budgerigars (Melopsittacus undulatus): III. Contact calls. Journal of Comparative Psychology 1988, 102:236-247.
8. Burdick C.K., Miller J.D. Speech perception by the chinchilla: Discrimination of sustained /a/ and /i/. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 1975, 58:415-427.
9. Catchpole C.K., Slater P.J.B. Bird song: Biological themes and variations 2008, Cambridge University Press, New York. 2 Ed.
10. Dawson M.R.W., Charrier I., Sturdy C.B. Using an artificial neural network to classify black-capped chickadee (Poecile atricapillus) call note types. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 2006, 119:3161-3172.
11. Deecke V.B., Janik V.M. Automated categorization of bioacoustic signals: Avoiding perceptual pitfalls. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 2006, 119:645-653.
12. Dooling R.J., Brown S.D. Speech perception by budgerigars (Melopsittacus undulatus): Spoken vowels. Perception & Psychophysics 1990, 47:568-574.
13. Dooling R.J., Brown S.D. Auditory perception of conspecific and heterospecific vocalizations in birds: Evidence for special processes. Journal of Comparative Psychology 1992, 106:20-28.
14. Dooling R.J., Brown S.D., Park T.J., Okanoya K., Soli S.D. Perceptual organization of acoustic stimuli by budgerigars (Melopsittacus undulatus): I. Pure tones. Journal of Comparative Psychology 1987, 101:139-149.
15. Dooling R.J., Okanoya K. Psychophysical methods for assessing perceptual categories. Methods in Comparative Psychoacoustics 1995, 307-318. Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel, Switzerland. G.M. Klump, R.J. Dooling, R.R. Fay, W.C. Stebbins (Eds.).
16. Dooling R.J., Park T.J., Brown S.D., Okanoya K., Soli S.D. Perceptual organization of acoustic stimuli by budgerigars (Melopsittacus undulatus): II. Vocal signals. Journal of Comparative Psychology 1987, 101:367-381.
17. Doupe A.J., Kuhl P.K. Birdsong and human speech: Common themes and mechanisms. Annual Review of Neuroscience 1999, 22:567-631.
18. Farabaugh S.M., Brown E.D., Dooling R.J. Analysis of warble song of the budgerigar Melopsittacus undulatus. Bioacoustics 1992, 4:111-130.
19. Farabaugh S.M., Dooling R.J. Acoustic communication in parrots: Laboratory and field studies of budgerigars, Melopsittacus undulatus. Ecology and evolution of acoustic communication in birds 1996, 97-120. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY. D.E. Kroodsma, E.H. Miller (Eds.).
20. Gentner T.Q., Hulse S.H. Perceptual mechanisms for individual vocal recognition in European starlings, Sturnus vulgaris. Animal Behaviour 1998, 56:579-594.
21. Gentner T.Q., Hulse S.H. Perceptual classification based on the component structure of song in European starlings. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 2000, 107:3369-3381.
22. Goldstein M.H., King A.P., West M.J. Social interactio shapes babbling: Testing parallels between birdsong and speech. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 2003, 100:8030-8035.
23. Goldstone R. Influences of categorization on perceptual discrimination. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 1994, 123:178-200.
24. Hillenbrand J., Getty L.A., Clark M.J., Wheeler K. Acoustic characteristics of American English vowels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 1995, 97:3099-3111.
25. Horn A.G., Falls J.B. Categorization and the design of signals: The case of song repertoires. Ecology and evolution of acoustic communication in birds 1996, 121-135. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY. D.E. Kroodsma, E.H. Miller (Eds.).
26. Jesteadt W. The variance of d' estimates obtained in yes-no and two-interval forced choice procedures. Perception & Psychophysics 2005, 67:72-80.
27. Kirby S. Learning, bottlenecks and the evolution of recursive syntax. Linguistic evolution through language acquisition 2002, 173-204. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K. T. Briscoe (Ed.).
28. Kluender K.R., Diehl R.L., Killeen P.R. Japanese quail can learn phonetic categories. Science 1987, 237:1195-1197.
29. Kuhl P.K., Miller J.D. Speech perception by the chinchilla: Voiced-voiceless distinction in alveolar plosive consonants. Science 1975, 190:69-72.
30. Liberman A.M., Mattingly I.G. The motor theory of speech perception revised. Cognition 1985, 21:1-36.
31. Lisker L., Abramson A.S. A cross-language study of voicing in initial stops: Acoustical measurements. Word 1964, 20:384-422.
32. Macmillan N.A., Creelman C.D. Detection theory: A user's guide 2005, Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ. 2nd ed.
33. Marler P. Birdsong and speech development: Could there be parallels?. American Scientist 1970, 58:669-673.
34. Marler P. Origins of music and speech: Insights from animlas. The origins of music 2000, 31-48. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA. N.L. Wallin, B. Merker, S. Brown (Eds.).
35. Marler P. Science and birdsong: The good old days. Nature's music: The science of birdsong 2004, 1-38. Elsevier Academic Press, San Diego, CA. P. Marler, H. Slabbekoorn (Eds.).
36. Marler P., Peters S. Birdsong and speech: Evidence for special processing. Perspectives on the study of speech 1981, 75-112. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ. P.D. Eimas, J.L. Miller (Eds.).
37. Ohms V.R., Gill A., van Heijningen C.A.A., Beckers G.J.L., ten Cate C. Zebra finches exhibit speaker independent phonetic perception of human speech. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 2010, 277:1003-1009.
38. Okanoya K. The Bengalese finch: A window on the behavioral neurobiology of birdsong syntax. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 2004, 1016:724-735.
39. Okanoya K., Dooling R.J. Obtaining acoustic similarity measures from animals: A method for species comparisons. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 1988, 83:1690-1693.
40. Okanoya K., Dooling R.J. Perception of distance calls by budgerigars (Melopsittacus undulatus) and zebra finches (Poephila guttata): Assessing species-specific advantages. Journal of Comparative Psychology 1991, 105:60-72.
41. Peterson G.E., Barney H.L. Control methods used in a study of the vowels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 1952, 24:175-184.
42. Pickett J.M. Prosodic and tonal features. The acoustics of speech communication 1999, 75-98. Allyn & Bacon, Needham Heights, MA. J.M. Pickett (Ed.).
43. Pothos E.M., Chater N. A simplicity principle in unsupervised human categorization. Cognitive Science 2002, 26:303-343.
44. Ranjard L., Ross H.A. Unsupervised bird song syllable classification using evolving neural networks. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 2008, 123:4358-4368.
45. Roitblat H.L., von Fersen L. Comparative cognition: Representations and processes in learning and memory. Annual Review of Psychology 1992, 43:671-710.
46. Searcy W.A., Yasukawa K. Song and female choice. Ecology and evolution of acoustic communication in birds 1996, 454-473. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY. D.E. Kroodsma, E.H. Miller (Eds.).
47. Seyfarth R.M., Cheney D.L. Signalers and receivers in animal communication. Annual Review of Psychology 2003, 54:145-173.
48. Smith W.J. The behavior of communicating: An ethological approach 1977, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
49. Todt D. From birdsong to speech: A plea for comparative approaches. Annals of the Brazilian Academy of Sciences 2004, 76:201-208.
50. Trillmich F. Spatial proximity and mate specific behaviour in a flock of budgerigars (Melopsittacus undulatus; Aves, Psittacidae). Zeitschrift für Tierpsychologie 1976, 41:307-331.
51. Tu, H-W., & Dooling, R. J. (2010, April). Perception of alterations in natural budgerigar (Melopsittacus undulatus) warble: Implications of animal " syntactical capability." Paper presented at the 159th Meeting of the Acoustical Society of America.
52. Wilbrecht L., Nottebohm F. Vocal learning in birds and humans. Mental Retardation and Development Disabilities Reserach Reviews 2003, 9:135-148.
53. Wyndham E. Diurnal cycle, behavior, and social organization in the budgerigar (Melopsittacus undulatus). Emu 1980, 80:25-33.
54. Zann R.A. The zebra finch: A synthesis of field and laboratory studies 1996, Oxford University Press, New York.