Recieved: 10/12/2020
Accepted: 11/24/2020
Published: 12/30/2020
Keywords: visual recognition; geometric shapes; individual characteristics; reptiles; impulsivity; decision making; labyrinth
p.: 148-160
DOI: 10.11621/npj.2020.0412
Available online: 30.10.2020
Zhelankin Roman V., Skotnikova Irina G., Selivanova Lyubov A., Dmitrieva Anastasia S.. Individual features of geometric figures discrimination by three species of reptiles. // National Psychological Journal 2020. 4. p.148-160. doi: 10.11621/npj.2020.0412
Copied to Clipboard
CopyBackground (context). The individual characteristics of reptiles have been studied less than that of other classes of animals.One of the basic properties of their individuality, impulsivity, on which behavior and the solution of cognitive tasks in humans and animals significantly depend, has not been practically investigated.
Objective. To study manifestations of impulsivity in decision-making in visual recognition in three types of reptiles.
Design. In ten experiments, each of six individuals of three reptile species chose one of two paths in the task of distinguishing geometric shapes in mazes.The indicators of the percentage of erroneous choices and the average time for making choices were evaluated relative to the corresponding median values, similar to the study of a person's impulsivity when choosing among similar visual images in the Kagan test.
Results.Among the individuals of each species, four individual typological groups were distinguished: impulsive, slow –accurate, fast –accurate, and slow –inaccurate. This confirmed the authors' hypothesis based on their study of color recognition in common grass snakes. In slow –accurate and slow –inaccurate individuals, repeated turns to the stimuli being compared were observed before they made a decision, apparently reflecting the expanded analysis of visual information, unlike in most impulsive and fast-accurate individuals.
Conclusions. The four individual-typological groups identified in the three types of reptiles in the task of visual recognition are similar in terms of impulsivity to the known groups of people identified in a similar task. The differences in the behavioral reactions of individuals of the four typological groups of reptiles before making a decision correspond to the different psychological content of such a choice in these groups. Our results, which were obtained for reptiles for the first time, confirm the concept of impulsivity as one of the fundamental biologically determined characteristics of individuality, which is valid for other species of animals and humans. In the future it would be useful to find out: 1. Whether the following methods of studying impulsivity evaluate the same individual characteristic of animals: the well-known method of choosing the type of reinforcement and the auto method of choosing the path in the labyrinth with visual discrimination; 2. Do the assessments of impulsivity by these methods correlate with assessments of courage in reactions to a new object, territory and food? The practical significance of the work lies in the fact that knowledge of the individual characteristics of reptiles allows us to develop scientifically based recommendations for maintaining their well-being in zoos and nurseries.
Animal Personalities: Behaviour, Physiology, and Evolution: collection of scientific articles(2013). C. Carere, D. Maestripieri (Eds.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Blinnikova I.V., Izmalkova A.I.(2017). Patterns of eye movements in the process of the search on web pages in reflective and impulsive subjects.Fundamental and applied research in modern psychology: results and development prospects.Moscow, Publishing house “RAS Institute of Psychology”, 432–440.
Boogert, N.J., Reader, S.M., Laland, K.N. (2006). The relation between social rank, neophobia, and individual learning in starlings. Animal Behavior,72, 1229–1239. doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2006.02.021)
Brommer, J.E., Class, B. (2017). Personality from the Perspective ofBehavioral Ecology. In: J. Vonk, A. Weiss, S. Kuczaj (Eds). Personality in Nonhuman Animals. Cham: Springer, 73–107. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-59300-5_5.
Cameron, S.F., Wheatley, R., Wilson, R.S. (2018). Sex-specific thermal sensitivities of performance and activity in the Asian house gecko, Hemidactylus frenatus. Journal of Comparative Physiology, 188 (4), 635–647.doi: 10.1007/s00360-018-1149-2
Carazo, P., Noble, D.W.A., Chandrasoma, D., & Whiting, M.J. (2014). Sex and boldness explain individual differences in spatial learning in a lizard. Proceedings of the Royal Society: Biological Sciences,281 (1782), 1–9.doi: 10.1098/rspb.2013.3275
Carter, A.J., Heinsohn, R., Goldizen, A.W., Biro, P. (2012). Boldness, trappability and sampling bias in wild lizards. Animal Behaviour, 83 (4), 1051–1058. doi: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2012.01.033
Cooper, Jr. W.E. (2009). Variation in Escape Behavior among Individuals of the Striped Plateau Lizard Sceloporus virgatus May Reflect Differences in Boldness. Journal of Herpetology, 43 (3), 495–502. doi: 10.1670/08-197R1.1
Dugatkin, L.A, Alfieri, M.S. (2003). Boldness, behavioural inhibition and learning. Ethology. Ecology. Evolution, 15, 43–49. doi:10.1080/08927014.2003.9522689.
Dukas, R. (1998). Cognitive Ecology: The Evolutionary Ecology of Information Processing and Decision Making: monograph. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Gosling, S.D. John, O.P. (1999). Personality dimensions in nonhuman animals: a cross-species review. Current directions in psychological science, 8 (3), 69–75. doi: 10.1111/1467-8721.00017
Gregory, P. T., Isaac, L. A., & Griffiths, R. A. (2007). Death feigning by grass snakes (Natrix natrix) in response to handling by human “predators.” Journal of Comparative Psychology, 121 (2), 123–129. doi: 10.1037/0735-7036.121.2.123
Herborn, K.A., Macleod, R., Miles, W.T.S., Schofield, A.N.B., Alexander, L., Arnold, K.E. (2010). Personality in captivity reflects personality in the wild Animal Behaviour, 79, 835–843. doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2009.12.026
Kholodnaya M.A.(2004). Cognitive Styles. On the Nature of the Individual Mind: Monograph.SPb ., Рublishing house Piter,384p.
KlausG. (1987). Introductiontodifferentialpsychologyoflearning: monograph. Moscow,PublishinghousePedagogika,176 p.
Manteuffel, B.P. (1987).Ecology of animal behavior.Ecological and evolutionary aspects of animal behavior: monograph.Moscow,Nauka,220 р.
Mell H., Josserand R., Decencire B., Artacho P., Meylan S., Le Galliard J.-F. (2016). Do personalities co-vary with metabolic expenditure and glucocorticoid stress response in adult lizards? Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol, 70, 951–961.doi: 10.1007/s00265-016-2117-z
Messer, S.B.(1976). Reflection–impulsivity: a review. Psychological Bulletin, 83, 1026–1052. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.83.6.1026
Michelangeli, M., Chapple, D.G., Goulet, C.T., Bertram, M.G., Wong, B.M. (2019). Behavioral syndromes vary among geographically distinct populations in a reptile. Behavioral Ecology, 30 (2), 393–401. doi: 10.1093/beheco/ary178
Mueller-Paul, J., Wilkinson A., Hall, G., Huber, L. (2012). Radial-Arm maze Behavior of the Red-Footed Tortoise (Geochelone carbonaria). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 126 (3), 305–317. doi: 10.1037/a0026881
Ochinskaya E.I., Flöss D.A.(1990). On the ability of marsh turtles to accurately extrapolate the trajectory of movement of the stimulus. Comparative physiology of higher nervous activity in humans and animals.Moscow, Nauka, 106–113.
Ratcliffe, J.M., Phelps, S.M. (2019). Twenty-five years of cognitive ecology. Animal Behaviour, 147, 127–128.doi: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2018.10.017.
Real, L.A. (1993). Toward a cognitive ecology. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 8 (11) 413–417. doi: 10.1016/0169-5347 (93) 90044-P.
Renda, C.R., Stein, J.S., Madden, G.J. (2014). Impulsive Choice Predicts Poor Working Memory in Male Rats. Journal of Experimental Animal Behaviour, 103 (1), 33–49. doi:10.1371/ journal.pone.0093263.
SafarovKh.M.(1990). Ecologyandphysiologyofhighernervousactivityinreptiles: monograph.Dushanbe,PublishinghouseDonish, 227 р.
Sih, A., Bell, A.M. (2008). Insights for behavioural ecology from behavioural syndromes. Advantage of Study Animal Behaviour,38,227–281. doi: 10.1016/S0065-3454(08)00005-3.
Skotnikova I.G. (2008). Problems of subjective psychophysics: monograph.Moscow, Publishing house “RAS Institute of Psychology”, 384 р.
Szabo, B., Noble, D.W.A., Byrne, R.W., Tait, D.S., Whiting, M.J. (2018). Subproblem learning and reversal of a multidimensional visual cue in a lizard: evidence for behavioural flexibility? Animal Behaviour, 144, 17–26.doi: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2018.07.018
Wang, M.Y., Brennan, C.H., Lachlan, R.F., Chittka, L. (2015). Speed-accuracy trade-offs and individually consistent decision making by individuals and dyads of zebrafish in a colour discrimination task. Animal Behaviour, 103, 277–283. doi: /10.1016/j.anbehav.2015.01.022
Ward–Fear, G., Brown, G.P., Pearson, D.J., West, A., Rollins, L.A., Shine, R. (2018). The ecological and life history correlates of boldness in free-ranging lizards. Ecosphere, 9 (3), 1–13. doi: 10.1002/ecs2.2125.
Wilson, A.D. M., Stevens, E.D. (2005). Consistency in context-specific measures of shyness and boldness in Rainbow Trout, Oncorhynchus mykiss. Ethology, 111 (9), 849–862. doi: 10.1111/j.1439-0310.2005.01110.x.
ZaichenkoM.I., SharkovaA.V.etal. (2016). Inhighlyimpulsiverats, signalmemoryinthe8-channelradiallabyrinthmanifestsitselfbetterthaninlowimpulsiveanimals.Zhurnal vysshei nervnoi deiatelnosti imeni I.P. Pavlova, 66 (5), 1–11.
Zhelankin R.V., Skotnikova I.G.(2017). Individual differences in decision making by ordinary grass snakes when choosing alternative behavior. II All-Russian Scientific Conference “Evolutionary and Comparative Psychology in Russia”. Moscow, Kogito-Center, 161–171.
Zhelankin Roman V., Skotnikova Irina G., Selivanova Lyubov A., Dmitrieva Anastasia S.. Individual features of geometric figures discrimination by three species of reptiles. // National Psychological Journal 2020. 4. p.148-160. doi: 10.11621/npj.2020.0412
Copied to Clipboard
Copy