Animal intelligence: Experimental studiesThorndike, Edward L. (Edward Lee)
Science
Animal intelligence: Experimental studies
Thorndike, Edward L. (Edward Lee)
Animal intelligence; Psychology, Comparative
Dog 1 was experimented on in the following manner: I would put him in a
big pen, 20×10 feet, and sit outside facing it, he watching me as was
his habit. I would pound with a stick and say, “Go over to the corner.”
After an interval (10 seconds for 35 trials, 5 seconds for 60 trials)
I would go over to the corner (12 feet off) and drop a piece of meat
there. He, of course, followed and secured it. On the 6th, 7th, 16th,
17th, 18th and 19th trials he did perform the act before the 10 seconds
were up, then for several times went during the two-minute intervals
without regarding the signal, and finally abandoned the habit altogether,
although he showed by his behavior when the signal was given that he was
not indifferent to it.
Dogs 1, 2 and 3 were also given 95, 135 and 95 trials, respectively,
the acts done being (1) standing up against the wire netting inclosing
the pen, (2) placing the paws on top of a keg, and (3) jumping up onto
a box. The time intervals were 5 seconds in each case. No dog of these
ever performed the act before I started to take the meat to feed them,
but they did show, by getting up if they were lying down when the signal
was given, or by coming to me if they were in some other part of the
pen, that something was suggested to them by it. Why these cases differ
from the cases of Cats 3 and 4 (10 and 12 also presented phenomena like
those reported in the cases of 3 and 4) is an interesting though not
very important question. The dogs were not kept so hungry as were the
cats, and experience had certainly not rendered the particular impulses
involved so sensitive, so ready to discharge. Dogs 2 and 3 were older.
There is no reason to invoke any qualitative difference in the mental
make-up of the animals until more illuminating experiments are made.
ASSOCIATION BY SIMILARITY AND THE FORMATION OF CONCEPTS
What there is to say on this subject from the standpoint of my
experiments will be best introduced by an account of the experiments
themselves.
Dog 1 had escaped from AA (O at front) 26 times. He was then put in
BB (O at back). Now, whereas 2 and 3, who were put in without previous
experience with AA, failed to paw the loop in BB, No. 1 succeeded. His
times were 7.00, .35, 2.05, .40, .32, .10, 1.10, .38, .10, .05, and from
then on he pawed the loop as soon as put in the box. After a day or so he
was put in BB1 (O at back high). Although the loop was in a new position,
his times were only .20, .10, .10, etc. After nine days he was put in a
box arranged with a little wooden platform 2½ inches square, hung where
the loop was in BB1. Although the platform resembled the loop not the
least save in position, his times were only .10, .07, .05, etc.
[Illustration: FIG. 21.]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account