FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W1978788385> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W1978788385 endingPage "739" @default.
• W1978788385 startingPage "733" @default.
• W1978788385 abstract "1. White-throated sparrows (Zonotrichia albicollis) were offered a model-mimic pair of painted sunflower-seed shells concealing variously treated mealworms, after first being trained to overturn shells to obtain the larvae. 2. The mimic seed presented to all birds was the same, a shell hiding an edible half mealworm. Four model groups with different levels of post attack reinforcement were used: positive reinforcement (edible mealworm), no reinforcement (no mealworm), weak negative reinforcement (salted mealworm), and strong negative reinforcement (an emetic mealworm). 3. The frequency with which the birds refused to attack the model/mimic seeds was a function of the degree of negative reinforcement. The greater the level of punishment for attacking a model, the more likely the bird was to refuse to attack the seeds during the presentation periods. 4. The protection offered a mimic, whose resemblance to its model was poor, was correlated in part with the degree of punishment following an attack on a model. Mimics of the emetic model were well-protected even when their resemblance to the model was very imperfect. However, this was not the case when the model was associated with weak negative or no reinforcement. 5. When the birds were given a pair of seeds which more closely resembled each other, those given a salted mealworm model attacked fewer mimics than those given an empty model. 6. Therefore, the protection enjoyed by a mimic in the experiment was a function of the unpalatability of its model and the degree of resemblance between the model and mimic. 7. The advantages of each model were discussed from the standpoint of the mimics. It was concluded that, in a punishment continuum, a non-reinforcing, neutral model (if abundant) and a strong negatively reinforcing emetic model would provide greater protection from attack than a purely distasteful model (weak negative reinforcement). The empty and emetic model would be ignored and avoided because they are totally inedible; the distasteful model would be attacked during periods of food shortage because it is nutritional although bad tasting." @default.
• W1978788385 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W1978788385 creator A5021237413 @default.
• W1978788385 date "1970-11-01" @default.
• W1978788385 modified "2023-10-17" @default.
• W1978788385 title "Punishment levels and the response of white-throated sparrows (Zonotrichia albicollis) to three kinds of artificial models and mimics" @default.
• W1978788385 cites W1978187303 @default.
• W1978788385 cites W2005202830 @default.
• W1978788385 cites W2012223627 @default.
• W1978788385 cites W2015045378 @default.
• W1978788385 cites W2025203976 @default.
• W1978788385 cites W2027285231 @default.
• W1978788385 cites W2027665073 @default.
• W1978788385 cites W2051336863 @default.
• W1978788385 cites W2052752460 @default.
• W1978788385 cites W2061858981 @default.
• W1978788385 cites W2066325694 @default.
• W1978788385 cites W2087990849 @default.
• W1978788385 cites W4238390451 @default.
• W1978788385 cites W4241650973 @default.
• W1978788385 cites W4250447247 @default.
• W1978788385 cites W4256011992 @default.
• W1978788385 cites W96174750 @default.
• W1978788385 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-3472(70)90019-9" @default.
• W1978788385 hasPublicationYear "1970" @default.
• W1978788385 type Work @default.
• W1978788385 sameAs 1978788385 @default.
• W1978788385 citedByCount "38" @default.
• W1978788385 countsByYear W19787883852017 @default.
• W1978788385 countsByYear W19787883852018 @default.
• W1978788385 countsByYear W19787883852020 @default.
• W1978788385 countsByYear W19787883852021 @default.
• W1978788385 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W1978788385 hasAuthorship W1978788385A5021237413 @default.
• W1978788385 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W1978788385 hasConcept C173758957 @default.
• W1978788385 hasConcept C18903297 @default.
• W1978788385 hasConcept C2779295839 @default.
• W1978788385 hasConcept C2780572849 @default.
• W1978788385 hasConcept C67203356 @default.
• W1978788385 hasConcept C77805123 @default.
• W1978788385 hasConcept C86803240 @default.
• W1978788385 hasConcept C90856448 @default.
• W1978788385 hasConceptScore W1978788385C15744967 @default.
• W1978788385 hasConceptScore W1978788385C173758957 @default.
• W1978788385 hasConceptScore W1978788385C18903297 @default.
• W1978788385 hasConceptScore W1978788385C2779295839 @default.
• W1978788385 hasConceptScore W1978788385C2780572849 @default.
• W1978788385 hasConceptScore W1978788385C67203356 @default.
• W1978788385 hasConceptScore W1978788385C77805123 @default.
• W1978788385 hasConceptScore W1978788385C86803240 @default.
• W1978788385 hasConceptScore W1978788385C90856448 @default.
• W1978788385 hasLocation W19787883851 @default.
• W1978788385 hasOpenAccess W1978788385 @default.
• W1978788385 hasPrimaryLocation W19787883851 @default.
• W1978788385 hasRelatedWork W1990964309 @default.
• W1978788385 hasRelatedWork W2006191342 @default.
• W1978788385 hasRelatedWork W2019751999 @default.
• W1978788385 hasRelatedWork W2039597793 @default.
• W1978788385 hasRelatedWork W2041804055 @default.
• W1978788385 hasRelatedWork W2130912176 @default.
• W1978788385 hasRelatedWork W2169784200 @default.
• W1978788385 hasRelatedWork W261604973 @default.
• W1978788385 hasRelatedWork W2731738020 @default.
• W1978788385 hasRelatedWork W3214623194 @default.
• W1978788385 hasVolume "18" @default.
• W1978788385 isParatext "false" @default.
• W1978788385 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W1978788385 magId "1978788385" @default.
• W1978788385 workType "article" @default.