Researches of Stimulus Equivalence and Interactions between Vocalization and Hearing
  Counts

      I have developped a real-time recognition system that can automatically reinforce vocalizations of birds. Before this syetem, experimenters needed to listen to the vocalization of birds to reinforce vocalizations. The system makes it possible to reinforce vocalization of birds objectively and immediately. My system can be used for various types of researche including an interaction between vocalization and hearing. The system has been used at Meisei University, Duke University, University of Maryland at College Park and Nihon University.

(Picture: A system of Meisei University in 1992)

 A short report in News Letter of APA, "Monitor"

     The following experiments used the system and studied vocal "naming", vocal learning and interactions between vocalization and hearing.


Manabe, K., Kawashima, T. and Staddon J.E.R. (1995) Differential Vocalizations in Budgerigars: Toward an Experimental Analysis of Naming. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, Vol.63, pp.111-126. 

Abstracts 

Movie of Experiment (You can see a budgerigar responding to red with a high-pitch call, to green with a low-pitch call.)

Related Articles

Sidman, M. (1995) Functional classes and equivalence via three-term contingencies. In M. Sidman (Ed.), Equivalence relations and behavior: A research story (pp. 463-474). Boston, MA: Authors Cooperative, Inc.

Saunders, K. J. and Williams, D. C. (1998) Do parakeets exhibit derived stimulus control? Some thoughts on experimental control procedures. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, Vol.70, pp.321-324. Abstracts

Sidman, M. (2000) Equivalence relations and the reinforcement contingency. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, Vol.74, pp.127-146. PDF file Abstracts

(Picture: Dr. Sidman and Mrs. Sidman were inquiring me about our experiments in '93 ABA conference in Chicago.)


Dooling,R.J., Brown, S.D., Manabe,K., and Powell,E.F.(1996) The perceptual foundations of vocal learning in budgerigars. In Moss, C.F. and Shettleworth, S. (Eds.) Neuroethological Studies of Cognitive and Perceptual Processes, pp. 104-128.

 

(Picture: A system ofUniversity of Maryland at College Park for hearing experiments)


Manabe, K., Staddon J.E.R. and Cleaveland J.M. (1997) Control of Vocal Repertoire by Reward in Budgerigars. Journal of Comparative Psychology, Vol.111, pp. 50-62.

  This paper descrive a method of differentiation of vocal responses using N-back procedure. In the N-back procedure, only vocalization other than N-different vocalizations that had been reinfored was reinforced. Budgerigars became to produce N + 1 vocalizations.

(Picture: A Skinner box of Duke University for budgerigars. A LCD monitor is in the front for presentation of visual stimuli.)


Manabe, K. and Dooling R.J. (1997) Control of Vocal Production in Budgerigars (Melopsittacus undulatus). Selective Reinforcement, Call Differentiation, and Stimulus Control. Behavioural Processes, Vol.41, pp.117-132.

(Picture: A Skinner box of University of Maryland at College Park for budgerigars. There are four LEDs instead of a LCD monitor in Duke type.)


Manabe, K. (1997) Vocal Plasticity in Budgerigars: Various Modifications of Vocalization by Operant Conditioning. Biomedical Research, Vol. 18, Supplement 1, pp.125-132.

  This paper described several methods of operant conditioning of vocal response, shaping, differentiation vocalization and selective reinforcement of vocalization.

(Picture: A real-time recognition system of University of Maryland at College.)


Dooling, R. J., Ryals, B. M. and Manabe, K. (1997) Recovery of Hearing and Vocal Behavior after Hair Cell Regeneration. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, Vol. 94, pp.14206-14210.

Abstracts

Reprint  (PDF)

Full Text  (HTML)

(Picture: The basal (high-frequency) half of the papillae of budgerigars sacrificed after 8 days of injection with kanamycin (0-day survival), 14-day survival, and 28-day survival.)


Manabe, K., Sadr E. I. and Dooling R. J. (1998) Control of Vocal Intensity in Budgerigars (Melopsittacus undulatus): Differential Reinforcement of Vocal Intensity and the Lombard Effect. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, Vol. 103, pp.1190-1198.

  It was found that budgerigars can control vocal intensity in a voluntary way. In addition, budgerigars showed the Lombard effect, increases in vocal intensity under noisy environments like humans.

(Picture: A micro FM-transmitter for budgerigars. The transmitter had a microphon, circuit, a buttery and an antena. The weight was about 1 g and the size was 3 mm X 8 mm X 10 mm. The transmitter with a microphone was atatched on the budgerigars' head to fix a distance between the microphone and mouth.)


Back to Home