Cargando…

The Challenge of Illusory Perception of Animals: The Impact of Methodological Variability in Cross-Species Investigation

SIMPLE SUMMARY: Research in neurobiology and ethology has given us a glimpse into the different perceptual worlds of animals. More recently, visual illusions have been used in behavioural research to compare the perception between different animal species. The studies conducted so far have provided...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Santacà, Maria, Agrillo, Christian, Miletto Petrazzini, Maria Elena
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8228898/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34070792
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ani11061618
_version_ 1783712850232999936
author Santacà, Maria
Agrillo, Christian
Miletto Petrazzini, Maria Elena
author_facet Santacà, Maria
Agrillo, Christian
Miletto Petrazzini, Maria Elena
author_sort Santacà, Maria
collection PubMed
description SIMPLE SUMMARY: Research in neurobiology and ethology has given us a glimpse into the different perceptual worlds of animals. More recently, visual illusions have been used in behavioural research to compare the perception between different animal species. The studies conducted so far have provided contradictory results, raising the possibility that different methodological approaches might influence illusory perception. Here, we review the literature on this topic, considering both field and laboratory studies. In addition, we compare the two approaches used in laboratories, namely spontaneous choice tests and training procedures, highlighting both their relevance and their potential weaknesses. Adopting both procedures has the potential to combine their advantages. Although this twofold approach has seldomly been adopted, we expect it will become more widely used in the near future in order to shed light on the heterogeneous pattern observed in the literature of visual illusions. ABSTRACT: Although we live on the same planet, there are countless different ways of seeing the surroundings that reflect the different individual experiences and selective pressures. In recent decades, visual illusions have been used in behavioural research to compare the perception between different vertebrate species. The studies conducted so far have provided contradictory results, suggesting that the underlying perceptual mechanisms may differ across species. Besides the differentiation of the perceptual mechanisms, another explanation could be taken into account. Indeed, the different studies often used different methodologies that could have potentially introduced confounding factors. In fact, the possibility exists that the illusory perception is influenced by the different methodologies and the test design. Almost every study of this research field has been conducted in laboratories adopting two different methodological approaches: a spontaneous choice test or a training procedure. In the spontaneous choice test, a subject is presented with biologically relevant stimuli in an illusory context, whereas, in the training procedure, a subject has to undergo an extensive training during which neutral stimuli are associated with a biologically relevant reward. Here, we review the literature on this topic, highlighting both the relevance and the potential weaknesses of the different methodological approaches.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8228898
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-82288982021-06-26 The Challenge of Illusory Perception of Animals: The Impact of Methodological Variability in Cross-Species Investigation Santacà, Maria Agrillo, Christian Miletto Petrazzini, Maria Elena Animals (Basel) Review SIMPLE SUMMARY: Research in neurobiology and ethology has given us a glimpse into the different perceptual worlds of animals. More recently, visual illusions have been used in behavioural research to compare the perception between different animal species. The studies conducted so far have provided contradictory results, raising the possibility that different methodological approaches might influence illusory perception. Here, we review the literature on this topic, considering both field and laboratory studies. In addition, we compare the two approaches used in laboratories, namely spontaneous choice tests and training procedures, highlighting both their relevance and their potential weaknesses. Adopting both procedures has the potential to combine their advantages. Although this twofold approach has seldomly been adopted, we expect it will become more widely used in the near future in order to shed light on the heterogeneous pattern observed in the literature of visual illusions. ABSTRACT: Although we live on the same planet, there are countless different ways of seeing the surroundings that reflect the different individual experiences and selective pressures. In recent decades, visual illusions have been used in behavioural research to compare the perception between different vertebrate species. The studies conducted so far have provided contradictory results, suggesting that the underlying perceptual mechanisms may differ across species. Besides the differentiation of the perceptual mechanisms, another explanation could be taken into account. Indeed, the different studies often used different methodologies that could have potentially introduced confounding factors. In fact, the possibility exists that the illusory perception is influenced by the different methodologies and the test design. Almost every study of this research field has been conducted in laboratories adopting two different methodological approaches: a spontaneous choice test or a training procedure. In the spontaneous choice test, a subject is presented with biologically relevant stimuli in an illusory context, whereas, in the training procedure, a subject has to undergo an extensive training during which neutral stimuli are associated with a biologically relevant reward. Here, we review the literature on this topic, highlighting both the relevance and the potential weaknesses of the different methodological approaches. MDPI 2021-05-30 /pmc/articles/PMC8228898/ /pubmed/34070792 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ani11061618 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Review
Santacà, Maria
Agrillo, Christian
Miletto Petrazzini, Maria Elena
The Challenge of Illusory Perception of Animals: The Impact of Methodological Variability in Cross-Species Investigation
title The Challenge of Illusory Perception of Animals: The Impact of Methodological Variability in Cross-Species Investigation
title_full The Challenge of Illusory Perception of Animals: The Impact of Methodological Variability in Cross-Species Investigation
title_fullStr The Challenge of Illusory Perception of Animals: The Impact of Methodological Variability in Cross-Species Investigation
title_full_unstemmed The Challenge of Illusory Perception of Animals: The Impact of Methodological Variability in Cross-Species Investigation
title_short The Challenge of Illusory Perception of Animals: The Impact of Methodological Variability in Cross-Species Investigation
title_sort challenge of illusory perception of animals: the impact of methodological variability in cross-species investigation
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8228898/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34070792
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ani11061618
work_keys_str_mv AT santacamaria thechallengeofillusoryperceptionofanimalstheimpactofmethodologicalvariabilityincrossspeciesinvestigation
AT agrillochristian thechallengeofillusoryperceptionofanimalstheimpactofmethodologicalvariabilityincrossspeciesinvestigation
AT milettopetrazzinimariaelena thechallengeofillusoryperceptionofanimalstheimpactofmethodologicalvariabilityincrossspeciesinvestigation
AT santacamaria challengeofillusoryperceptionofanimalstheimpactofmethodologicalvariabilityincrossspeciesinvestigation
AT agrillochristian challengeofillusoryperceptionofanimalstheimpactofmethodologicalvariabilityincrossspeciesinvestigation
AT milettopetrazzinimariaelena challengeofillusoryperceptionofanimalstheimpactofmethodologicalvariabilityincrossspeciesinvestigation