Row blocks horse9/18/2023 ![]() ![]() ![]() visual input is received from just one eye, (Waring 2003). Unlike in humans, the visual field of horses is mainly monocular (i.e. ![]() reflectance of photographic surface, Fagot and Parron 2010). Prior to image processing, the perceptual abilities of the viewer also need to be considered, for instance, whether an animal is able to identify an object from an image despite the lack of depth cues or additional cues (e.g. Investigating image recognition is challenging because pictures can never be identical to their 3D referents given the lack of dimensionality, depth cues and olfactory characteristics, which results in substantial sensory differences between objects and their 2D imitations (Bovet and Vauclair 2000 Aust and Huber 2006). For instance, if images are used to imitate real stimuli in behavioural experiments, animals need to respond to images in a comparable way to how they respond to real stimuli (D’Eath 1998). digital images, videos) for animal studies is likely to depend on the purpose of the stimuli. Therefore, the suitability of artificial representations (e.g. 2010).Ī variety of factors, including cognitive limitations or experience with images, could influence which processing mode is deployed by animals and ultimately lead to differences in how images are treated by humans and other animal species (Fagot and Parron 2010). images are used as referential cues for real-life objects, Fagot 2000 Fagot et al. In a processing mode of equivalence, images are understood as representations of their referents (i.e. Conversely, in a mode of independence, images could be perceived as different from their referents without making an association between objects and their images. In a mode of confusion, images and their real-life exemplars are perceived and treated as functionally and physically the same thing. ( 2010) proposed that animals could ‘read’ images using different processing modes. Moreover, how images are perceived and cognitively processed is not fully understood for most animal species (Fagot 2000 Fagot et al. This might be because pictures designed for the human eye may not result in the same sensory experiences in other species with different functional visual systems (Fagot and Parron 2010 Weisman and Spetch 2010). ![]() However, scientific evidence of object-image recognition in animals is not always consistent (reviewed in Fagot 2000 Bovet and Vauclair 2000 Weisman and Spetch 2010). Screen-displayed visuals are of advantage in research as stimulus timing and presentation of identical stimuli can be repeatedly presented to the same or to different subject animals (D’Eath 1998). printed photos, digital images, silhouettes, videos) are used as substitutes for real-life objects, or individuals, in cognition studies of non-human animals, including horses. Visual 2-dimensional representations (e.g. age, welfare state) might have influenced animals’ response to the images, and the importance of validating the suitability of stimuli of this kind for cognitive studies in horses. We discuss how methodological factors and individual differences (i.e. Our findings thus question whether horses recognise real-life objects from digital images. Only one horse touched the correct image above chance level across 10 image trials (9/10 correct responses, p = 0.021). At first image presentation, all but two horses spontaneously responded to the images with the learnt behaviour by contacting one of the two images, but the number of horses touching the correct image was not different from chance (14/27 horses, p > 0.05). After discrimination learning (three consecutive sessions of 8/10 correct trials), horses were immediately tested with on-screen images of the objects over 10 image trials interspersed with five real object trials. Riding-school horses ( N = 27) learnt to touch one of two objects (target object counterbalanced between horses) to instantly receive a food reward. We expected that horses trained to discriminate between two real-life objects would show the same learnt response to digital images of these objects indicating that the images were perceived as objects, or representations of such. Horses are reported to recognise objects and individuals (conspecifics and humans) from printed photographs, but it is unclear whether image recognition is also true for digital images, e.g. photographs or digital images) of real-life physical objects has been an important tool in studies of animal cognition. The use of 2-dimensional representations (e.g. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply.AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |