No evidence of real-world equivalence in chickens (Gallus gallus domesticus) categorizing visually diverse images of natural stimuli presented on LCD monitors.

Abstract

Category learning is often tested with similar images that have no significance outside of the experiment for the subjects. By contrast, in nature animals often need to generalize a behavioral response like "eat" across visually distinct stimuli, such as spiders and seeds. Forming functional categories like "food" and "predator" may require conceptual rather than purely perceptual generalization. We trained free-range chickens to classify images assigned to one of four categories based on putative functional significance: inanimate objects, predators, food, and non-competing vertebrates. Images were visually diverse within each category, discouraging classification by perceptual similarity alone. In Experiment 1, chickens classified 80 images into four categories. Chickens then generalized to 80 new exemplars in each of three successive generalization tests. In Experiment 2, chickens saw new types of images to test whether their generalization was perceptual or functional. For example, chickens saw images of skunks for the predator category after training with images of hawks and snakes. Chickens used the "predator" response with these new images for both predators and non-threatening vertebrates, but not for objects or food, and did not successfully generalize any category other than predator. In Experiment 3, chickens categorized fractals as "food," and three of four chickens categorized a range of vertebrates they had not previously encountered as "predators," suggesting that chickens did not see the images as representing real world objects and animals. These results highlight constraints on the use of computer-generated images to assess categorization of natural stimuli in chickens.