Muszynski and Couvillon (see record 2020-37265-001) built upon their previous findings that honeybees can learn the relation among triads of trial-unique visual stimuli. In this new work, they showed that bees encountering trial-unique sets of three or four visual stimuli chose the correct stimulus at above-chance levels, replicating their previous findings and extending them to four-choice displays. In the first experiment, the bees' performance with triads of stimuli was unaffected by whether the correct choice was patterned or solid, or whether the stimuli shared a common color. A control group in this experiment encountered a categorical discrimination problem with two stimuli. This latter group of bees easily learned the discrimination and made a lower proportion of errors than bees solving the oddity problem, suggesting that the bees did not perceive the oddity task as a discrimination problem. The possibility that bees solved the oddity problem as a categorical discrimination was further examined in a second experiment. In that experiment, one group of bees encountered quartets of disks in combinations of solid color and two-color disks, and another group encountered only two-color disks. The authors expected that the addition of an irrelevant category (solid or two-color disk) would make the odd stimulus more discriminable, and, therefore, improve performance in that group compared with the group that encountered only two-colored disks. Their expectation was confirmed: Bees that encountered stimuli with a categorical difference, even though the category was irrelevant to which disk (of four) was odd, averaged more correct choices (average .67 vs. .47 across 15 trials; .25 expected by chance) and reached a higher terminal level of performance than bees that encountered only two-color disks (nearing .90 vs. around .50 correct, Trials 14 -16, solid and pattern group vs. pattern-only group, respectively). (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

中文翻译：

---

赔率偏爱蜜蜂。

Muszynski和Couvillon（请参阅记录2020-37265-001）建立在他们先前的发现之上，即蜜蜂可以了解试验独特视觉刺激的三联征之间的关系。在这项新工作中，他们表明，遇到三到四个视觉刺激的独特试验组的蜜蜂在机会出现率较高的水平上选择了正确的刺激，复制了它们先前的发现并将其扩展为四选择显示。在第一个实验中，蜜蜂受三联刺激的表现不受图案或固体的正确选择，或者刺激是否具有共同的颜色的影响。在该实验中，对照组遇到具有两种刺激的分类歧视问题。与解决奇数问题的蜜蜂相比，后一组蜜蜂更容易学会区分，并且犯错的比例更低，这表明蜜蜂没有将奇异任务视为歧视问题。在第二个实验中，进一步检验了蜜蜂解决分类问题的奇异性问题的可能性。在该实验中，一组蜜蜂遇到了四重组合纯色和两种颜色的磁盘，而另一组只遇到了两种颜色的磁盘。作者期望添加不相关的类别（纯色或双色磁盘）将使可分辨的刺激更加可辨，因此，与仅遇到双色磁盘的组相比，该组的性能有所提高。他们的期望得到了证实：即使类别与哪个磁盘（奇数）（奇数）不相关，蜜蜂遇到的刺激也存在明显差异，它们的平均选择更为正确（平均值为.67与。）。15个试验中有47个；与仅遇到两色圆盘的蜜蜂（分别为.90和.50左右正确，试验14 -16，实心和图案组与仅图案组相比）相比较，并达到了更高的终端性能水平分别）。（PsycInfo数据库记录（c）2020 APA，保留所有权利）。