Animal intelligence: Experimental studiesThorndike, Edward L. (Edward Lee)
Science
Animal intelligence: Experimental studies
Thorndike, Edward L. (Edward Lee)
Animal intelligence; Psychology, Comparative
To such a height possible delicacy may attain, but possible delicacy is
quite another thing from actual untrained and unstimulated delicacy.
The difference in reaction has to be brought about by associating with
pleasure the reaction to the different sense-impression when it itself
differs and associating with pain tendencies to confuse the reactions.
The animal does not naturally as a function of sense-powers discriminate
at all delicately. Thus the cat who climbed up the wire netting when
I said, “I must feed those cats!” did not have a delicate association
of just that act with just those words. For after I had dropped the
clapping part of the signal and simply used those words, it would react
just as vigorously to the words, “To-morrow is Tuesday” or “My name is
Thorndike.” The reaction naturally was to a very vague stimulus. Taking
cat 10 when just beginning to learn to climb up at the signal, “I must
feed those cats!” I started in to improve the delicacy, by opposing to
this formula the formula, “I will not feed them,” after saying which, I
kept my word. That is, I gave sometimes the former signal and fed the
cats, sometimes the latter and did not. The object was to see how long
the cat would be in learning always to go up when I gave the first, never
to do so when I gave the second signal. I said the words in both cases
as I naturally would do, so that there was a difference in emphasis and
tone as well as in the mere nature of the syllables. The two signals were
given in all sorts of combinations so that there was no regularity in the
recurrence of either which might aid the animal. The cat at first did not
always climb up at the first signal and often _did_ climb up at the wrong
one. The change from this condition to one of perfect discrimination is
shown in the accompanying curves (Fig. 22), one showing the decrease in
_failures_ to respond to the wrong signal. The first curve is formed by
a line joining the tops of perpendiculars erected at intervals of 1 mm.
along the abscissa. The height of a perpendicular represents the number
of times the cat failed to respond to the food-signal in 20 trials, a
height of 1 mm. being the representative of one failure. Thus, the entire
curve stands for 280 trials, there being no failures after 60 trials, and
only 1 after the 40th.
[Illustration: FIG. 22.]
In the other curve, also, each 1 mm. along the abscissa stands for 20
trials, and the perpendiculars whose tops the curve unites represent the
number of times the cat in each 20 _did_ climb up at the signal which
meant no food. It will be seen that 380 experiences were necessary before
the animal learned that the second signal was different from the first.
The experiment shows beautifully the animal method of acquisition. If
at any stage the animal could have isolated the two ideas of the two
sense-impressions, and felt them together in comparison, this long and
tedious process would have been unnecessary.
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