仓鼠对气味的吸引力:对方法的评价。

R E Johnston
{"title":"仓鼠对气味的吸引力:对方法的评价。","authors":"R E Johnston","doi":"10.1037/h0077840","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Six different attraction tasks (one stimulus presented at a time) and five preference tasks were compared. In five of the six attraction tasks, one stimulus (vaginal secretion) was sniffed by males longer than any other stimulus, but the degree of difference between the stimulus and the others, and the relative attractiveness or aversiveness of the other stimuli, varied greatly across methods. One method was not useful for demonstrating differences in attraction to positive neutral odors but was useful for demonstrating aversions. In the preference tasks females demonstrated a significant preference for the odors of intact males over those of castrated males in four of the five methods, and again the strength of the preferences differed across methods. It is suggested that preference tasks are more sensitive and less subject to variability due to details of the method employed than are attraction tasks. Procedures in which the test animal's own home cage was used as the testing environment tended to emphasize effects due to novelty rather than the inherent attractiveness of the odorants. It is suggested that the use of novel objects as sources for test odors and the use of airstreams for delivery of odors reduce the salience of the test odorants.</p>","PeriodicalId":15394,"journal":{"name":"Journal of comparative and physiological psychology","volume":"95 6","pages":"951-60"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1981-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1037/h0077840","citationCount":"42","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Attraction to odors in hamsters: an evaluation of methods.\",\"authors\":\"R E Johnston\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/h0077840\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Six different attraction tasks (one stimulus presented at a time) and five preference tasks were compared. In five of the six attraction tasks, one stimulus (vaginal secretion) was sniffed by males longer than any other stimulus, but the degree of difference between the stimulus and the others, and the relative attractiveness or aversiveness of the other stimuli, varied greatly across methods. One method was not useful for demonstrating differences in attraction to positive neutral odors but was useful for demonstrating aversions. In the preference tasks females demonstrated a significant preference for the odors of intact males over those of castrated males in four of the five methods, and again the strength of the preferences differed across methods. It is suggested that preference tasks are more sensitive and less subject to variability due to details of the method employed than are attraction tasks. Procedures in which the test animal's own home cage was used as the testing environment tended to emphasize effects due to novelty rather than the inherent attractiveness of the odorants. It is suggested that the use of novel objects as sources for test odors and the use of airstreams for delivery of odors reduce the salience of the test odorants.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15394,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of comparative and physiological psychology\",\"volume\":\"95 6\",\"pages\":\"951-60\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1981-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1037/h0077840\",\"citationCount\":\"42\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of comparative and physiological psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/h0077840\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of comparative and physiological psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/h0077840","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 42

摘要

比较了六种不同的吸引任务(一次呈现一种刺激)和五种偏好任务。在六个吸引任务中的五个中,一个刺激(阴道分泌物)被男性闻的时间比其他任何刺激都长,但是刺激和其他刺激之间的差异程度,以及其他刺激的相对吸引力或厌恶程度,在不同的方法中差异很大。有一种方法在证明对积极的中性气味的吸引力差异时无效,但在证明厌恶气味时有用。在偏好任务中,在五种方法中的四种中,雌性对完整雄性的气味比阉割雄性的气味表现出明显的偏好,而且偏好的强度在不同的方法中也有所不同。这表明,偏好任务比吸引力任务更敏感,而且由于所采用的方法的细节,对可变性的影响更小。在实验中,用实验动物自己的笼子作为测试环境,往往强调气味的新颖性,而不是气味本身的吸引力。有人建议,使用新的物体作为测试气味的来源和使用气流来传递气味会降低测试气味的显着性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Attraction to odors in hamsters: an evaluation of methods.

Six different attraction tasks (one stimulus presented at a time) and five preference tasks were compared. In five of the six attraction tasks, one stimulus (vaginal secretion) was sniffed by males longer than any other stimulus, but the degree of difference between the stimulus and the others, and the relative attractiveness or aversiveness of the other stimuli, varied greatly across methods. One method was not useful for demonstrating differences in attraction to positive neutral odors but was useful for demonstrating aversions. In the preference tasks females demonstrated a significant preference for the odors of intact males over those of castrated males in four of the five methods, and again the strength of the preferences differed across methods. It is suggested that preference tasks are more sensitive and less subject to variability due to details of the method employed than are attraction tasks. Procedures in which the test animal's own home cage was used as the testing environment tended to emphasize effects due to novelty rather than the inherent attractiveness of the odorants. It is suggested that the use of novel objects as sources for test odors and the use of airstreams for delivery of odors reduce the salience of the test odorants.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信