Abstract
Barn owls do not immediately approach a source after they hear a sound, but wait for a second sound before they strike. This represents a gain in striking behavior by avoiding responses to random incidents. However, the first stimulus is also expected to change the threshold for perceiving the subsequent second sound, thus possibly introducing some costs. We mimicked this situation in a behavioral double-stimulus paradigm utilizing saccadic head turns of owls. The first stimulus served as an adapter, was presented in frontal space, and did not elicit a head turn. The second stimulus, emitted from a peripheral source, elicited the head turn. The time interval between both stimuli was varied. Data obtained with double stimulation were compared with data collected with a single stimulus from the same positions as the second stimulus in the double-stimulus paradigm. Sound-localization performance was quantified by the response latency, accuracy, and precision of the head turns. Response latency was increased with double stimuli, while accuracy and precision were decreased. The effect depended on the inter-stimulus interval. These results suggest that waiting for a second stimulus may indeed impose costs on sound localization by adaptation and this reduces the gain obtained by waiting for a second stimulus.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Journal of comparative physiology. A, Neuroethology, sensory, neural, and behavioral physiology
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
