Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “COMMUNICATION”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 271 records · Page 15Linked to original sources
PubMed1990

Communicating about communicating: when innate is not enough.

The cowbird is a brood parasite, providing no parental care to its offspring. The species has often been cited as a model of the usefullness of the construct of innate behavior, as an explanation of how young cowbirds develop species-typical behavior. Here we evaluate the adequacy of this perspective. We show that although it is difficult to explain ontogenetic beginnings without recourse to the concept of innate behaviors, ontogenetic outcomes are less easily accommodated. Constraints on the explanatory power of innateness as an ontogenetic concept are demonstrated with data from the development of singing in cowbirds and the development of babbling in human infants.

Animal Communication↗
PubMed1987

Communication, symbolic communication, and language: reply to Seidenberg and Petitto.

Seidenberg and Petitto's (1987) assertion that Kanzi and Mulika's lexigram usage is not representational is evaluated by contrasting their abilities with Nim's. Kanzi and Mulika's data indicate that they (a) comprehend spoken English words; (b) can identify lexigram symbols when they hear these words; (c) can comprehend lexigram usage; (d) can use lexigrams when referents are absent and can, if asked, lead someone to the referent; and (e) that all these skills were acquired through observation, not conditioning. Nim evidenced no comprehension of signs and could not use signs when referents were absent. He was forced to sign and encouraged to imitate his teachers. Seidenberg and Petitto's negative experiences with Nim apparently led them to overgeneralize to all other apes, regardless of species, modality, or training history. Consequently, they unjustifiably disregard important components of Kanzi and Mulika's comprehension data which demonstrate that their lexical knowledge could not have been acquired in an instrumental fashion.

Animals↗