Signalers and receivers in animal communication. Seyfarth, R. M & Cheney, D. L Annu Rev Psychol, 54:145-73, 2003.
doi  abstract   bibtex   
In animal communication natural selection favors callers who vocalize to affect the behavior of listeners and listeners who acquire information from vocalizations, using this information to represent their environment. The acquisition of information in the wild is similar to the learning that occurs in laboratory conditioning experiments. It also has some parallels with language. The dichotomous view that animal signals must be either referential or emotional is false, because they can easily be both: The mechanisms that cause a signaler to vocalize do not limit a listener's ability to extract information from the call. The inability of most animals to recognize the mental states of others distinguishes animal communication most clearly from human language. Whereas signalers may vocalize to change a listener's behavior, they do not call to inform others. Listeners acquire information from signalers who do not, in the human sense, intend to provide it.
@Article{Seyfarth2003,
  author   = {Robert M Seyfarth and Dorothy L Cheney},
  journal  = {Annu Rev Psychol},
  title    = {Signalers and receivers in animal communication.},
  year     = {2003},
  pages    = {145-73},
  volume   = {54},
  abstract = {In animal communication natural selection favors callers who vocalize
	to affect the behavior of listeners and listeners who acquire information
	from vocalizations, using this information to represent their environment.
	The acquisition of information in the wild is similar to the learning
	that occurs in laboratory conditioning experiments. It also has some
	parallels with language. The dichotomous view that animal signals
	must be either referential or emotional is false, because they can
	easily be both: The mechanisms that cause a signaler to vocalize
	do not limit a listener's ability to extract information from the
	call. The inability of most animals to recognize the mental states
	of others distinguishes animal communication most clearly from human
	language. Whereas signalers may vocalize to change a listener's behavior,
	they do not call to inform others. Listeners acquire information
	from signalers who do not, in the human sense, intend to provide
	it.},
  doi      = {10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145121},
  keywords = {Animals, Wild, Botswana, Cognition, Family, Female, Hierarchy, Social, Language, Papio, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S., Social Dominance, Vocalization, Animal, Analysis of Variance, Appetitive Behavior, Attention, Birds, Discrimination (Psychology), Learning, Non-P.H.S., Social Behavior, Social Facilitation, Transfer (Psychology), Male, Pair Bond, Primates, Social Perception, Acoustic Stimulation, Acoustics, Auditory Perception, Brain, Cues, Discrimination Learning, Songbirds, Animal Migration, Biological Clocks, Calibration, Flight, Geography, Magnetics, Orientation, Solar System, Environment, Grooming, Kenya, Reproduction, Social Support, Survival Rate, Judgment, Macaca mulatta, Videotape Recording, Visual Perception, Comparative Study, Evolution, Fishes, Intelligence, Behavior, Feeding Behavior, Mathematics, Random Allocation, Spatial Behavior, Animal Communication, Cercopithecidae, Fear, Predatory Behavior, Altruism, Cercopithecus, Cercopithecus aethiops, Awareness, Concept Formation, Dominance-Subordination, Social Environment, Affect, Arousal, Motivation, Species Specificity, 12359915},
}

Downloads: 0