1 / 35

Tool Use and Causal Understanding

Tool Use and Causal Understanding. March 3 rd , 2009. Overview. Introduction to Tool Use and Causal Understanding What is learned - associative learning of causal understanding? 3 Case Studies: Tool Selection Gravity Tool Manufacture How are causal relations learned?. I. Introduction.

zea
Download Presentation

Tool Use and Causal Understanding

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Tool Use and Causal Understanding March 3rd, 2009

  2. Overview • Introduction to Tool Use and Causal Understanding • What is learned - associative learning of causal understanding? 3 Case Studies: • Tool Selection • Gravity • Tool Manufacture • How are causal relations learned?

  3. I. Introduction

  4. Tool Use

  5. What’s important about tool use? • Insight & Creativity • Using the environment in novel ways to achieve goals • Planning & Forethought • Thinking ahead • Responding to stimuli that aren’t in sight • Causal Understanding • “Folk Physics” • Understanding something about how the world works • Mediating forces

  6. Causal Understanding Event Outcome Associative learning: Predict the outcome – what is going to happen next? Causal understanding: WHY and HOW does the outcome occur? What is learned? Associative vs. Causal

  7. Causal Understanding Associative: Yellow ball moves after contact with blue ball Causal: Mediating forces – “force” imparted by blue ball is blocked by the barrier What is learned? Associative vs. Causal

  8. Causal Understanding • Mediating forces: • Different levels of complexity • Visible factors • Invisible factors • Psychological factors • Explanatory Attitude

  9. II. Case Studies a. Tool Selection

  10. Tool Selection • Can non-human animals recognize the functional properties of tools? • Hauser and colleagues – cottontoptamarins

  11. Tool Selection Hauser and colleagues – cottontoptamarins

  12. Transfer tests • Varied colour, texture, shape and size • Colour & texture are not ‘functional’ changes • Shape & size could be ‘functional’ changes • All canes set in the correct spatial arrangement

  13. Transfer Tests Monkeys preferred the non-functional changes Sensitive to changes in potential functionality

  14. More transfer tests • Similar results found with capuchins • Fujita, Kuroshima & Asai, 2003 • Included transfer tests in which an obstacle or a trap was on ‘drag path’ • Capuchins failed on these transfers • Understand spatial relationship between tool and food, but not tool, food and environment

  15. Tool selection in corvids New Caledonian crows Select tools of appropriate length in sight and out of sight

  16. Betty & Abel In sight: Out of sight (Abel only) • Two strategies: • Match distance or • Choose longest • What if length was un-usable? • Abstract representation (keep representation of tool and intended goal in mind)

  17. II. Case Studies b. Gravity

  18. The ‘Trap-tube’ task

  19. Capuchins & Chimps • Trap in the middle of the tube • Learned the task: • 1 out of 4 capuchins • 2 out of 5 chimps • Transfer tests showed that capuchins used a distance based rule

  20. Chimps • Chimps didn’t use distance based rule • Associative rule still possible • Insert stick on side of trap

  21. Criticisms • Failure to adjust behaviour on inverted tests • But there’s no penalty for not adjusting! • Human adults don’t adjust either • Instructional problem? • Too many factors? • Tool, food and environment • Adjusted task to remove tool use

  22. Modified Trap-tube • Allows subjects to pull or push • Prefer to pull • Distance and trap rules are not available

  23. Modified Trap-tube New Caledonian crows Similar transfer tests: 3/6 solved the transfers plus a trap-table task

  24. II. Case Studies c. Manufacturing tools

  25. Elephants – fly switching In the wild, elephants commonly use branches to repel flies Too long or too bushy branches presented to captive elephants

  26. New Caledonian Crows In the wild, tear pandanus leaves Barbed edges of leaf can be used to “fish” for insects in dead wood “cultural variation” in tool manufacture Naive birds can create pandanus tools without teaching

  27. New Caledonian crows • In the lab: • http://users.ox.ac.uk/~kgroup/tools/movies.shtml • Always inserted straight wire first • Insightful?

  28. III. How is causal understanding learned?

  29. Causal Bayes nets

  30. Rats Common Cause Causal Chain Light Light Tone Light Tone Food Light Food Blaisdell, Sawa, Leising & Waldmann, 2006 Test: Intervene-Tone or Observe-Tone

  31. Rats • Causal explanation: • If Tone just occurs, maybe Light came on first and was ‘missed’  Check for food! • If I caused the Tone to occur, Light didn’t happen  don’t check for food • Associative explanation: • If there is an association between the tone & food, shouldn’t matter whether you caused it or not  check for food at same rate. • Chain  always check

  32. Rats Rats respond in accordance with causal reasoning, not associative processes

  33. Problem • Causal Markov condition • During common-cause condition, tone and light should be causally independent • But, rats receive only tone or food following the light – they are NOT independent of each other • Thus, does not strictly follow causal Bayes net

  34. Instructional problems • Criticism: • Lack of evidence could be based on inability to properly instruct animals • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZmx0jml1jk • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pIAoJsS9Ix8&feature=related

More Related