Skip to Main Content

Experimental Psychology (Russia)
2017. Vol. 10, no. 3, 126–136
doi:10.17759/exppsy.2017100309
ISSN: 2072-7593 / 2311-7036 (online)

A comparative analysis of perception of the physical characteristics of body in snakes lampropeltis triangulum cambell and elaphe radiata

598

I.A. Khvatov, A.Y. Sokolov, A.N. Kharitonov

PDF (RUS)
Online translation in english
GS
Information
in Google Scholar

Abstract

Perception of physical characteristics of the body is a major component of the body schema in animals. The experimental studies of the perception of body limits were conducted on two species of colubridae snakes: Lampropeltis triangulum campbelli and Elaphe radiata. The experimental setup provided that the animals take into account the enlarged limits of their bodies while finding way through the holes of different sizes. Both species demonstrated the ability to take into account both natural and enlarged limits of the body. However, only the Elaphe radiata were able to transfer previously formed skills to take into account the body limits to new experimental conditions thus demonstrating greater lability of the organization of mental representation of the body in comparison with Lampropeltis triangulum campbelli.

General Information

Keywords: self-reflexion, body schema, snakes, arthropods, rats, phylogenesis of mind

Journal rubric: Evolutionary and Comparative Psychology

Article type: scientific article

DOI: https://doi.org/10.17759/exppsy.2017100309

For citation: Khvatov I.A., Sokolov A.Y., Kharitonov A.N. A comparative analysis of perception of the physical characteristics of body in snakes lampropeltis triangulum cambell and elaphe radiata. Eksperimental'naâ psihologiâ = Experimental Psychology (Russia), 2017. Vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 126–136. DOI: 10.17759/exppsy.2017100309. (In Russ., аbstr. in Engl.)

References

  1. Barabanschikov V.A. Vospriyatie i sobytie [Perception and Event]. SPb., Aleteiya Publ., 2002 (In Russian).
  2. Bekoff M. Observations of scent-marking and discriminating self from others by a domestic dog (Canis familiaris): tales of displaced yellow snow. Behavioural Processes, 2001, vol. 55, no 2, pp. 75—79.
  3. Cammaerts M.-C., Cammaerts R. Are ants (hymenoptera, formicidae) capable of self recognition? Journal of Science, 2015, vol. 5, no. 7, pp. 521—532.
  4. Gallagher S., Cole J. Body Schema and Body Image in a Deafferented Subject. Journal of Mind and Behavior, 1995, vol. 16, pp. 369—390. doi: 10.1068/p7027
  5. Gallup G., Jr. Chimpanzees: Self recognition. Science, 1970, vol. 167, no. 3914. P. 86—87.
  6. Garbarinia F., Fossataroa C., Bertia A., Gindria P., Romanod D., Piaa L., Gattaf F. Maravitad A. Neppi- Modona M. When your arm becomes mine: Pathological embodiment of alien limbs using tools modulates own body representation. Neuropsychologia, 2015, no. 70, pp. 402—413. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2014.11.008
  7. Giglia G., Pia L., Folegatti A., Puma P., Fierro B., Cosentino G., Berti A., Brighina F. Far Space Remapping by Tool Use: A rTMS Study Over the Right Posterior Parietal Cortex. Brain Stimulation, 2015, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 795—800. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brs.2015.01.412
  8. Head H., Holmes G. Sensory disturbances from cerebral lesions. Brain, 1911, vol. 34, no. 2—3, p. 102. doi:10.1093/brain/34.2-3.102
  9. Herman L.M., Matus D.S., Herman E.Y.K., Ivancic M., Pack A.A. The bottlenosed dolphin’s (Tursiops truncatus) understanding of gestures as symbolic representations of its body parts. Animal Learning &Behavior, 2001, vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 250—264.
  10. Johnson-Frey S. The neural bases of complex tool use in humans. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2004, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 71—78. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2003.12.002
  11. Khvatov I.A. Evolyutsiya samootrazheniya zhivotnykh i cheloveka v kontekste differentsionno- integratsionnogo podkhoda [Evolution of self-reflection in animals and humans in the context of differentiation-integration approach]. In N.I. Chuprikova, E.V. Volkova (eds.), Differentsionno- integratsionnaya teoriya razvitiya. Kn. 2. [Differentiation-Integration Theory of Development. Book 2]. Moscow, Yazyki slavyanskikh kul’tur Publ., 2014, pp. 343—360 (In Russian).
  12. Khvatov I.A. Glavnye napravleniya evolyutsii psikhiki v kontekste ontologicheskogo i differentsionno-integratsionnogo podkhodov. Chast’ 2 [Main directions of evolution of mind in the context of the differentiation-integration approach/ Part 2]. Psikhologicheskie issledovaniya [Psychological Studies], 2012, no. 2 (22), p. 12. URL: http://psystudy.ru/index.php/num/2012n2-22/648-khvatov22.html. doi: 0421200116/0024 (In Russian).
  13. Khvatov I.A. Spetsifika samootrazheniya u vida Periplaneta americana [Peculiarities of self-reflection in Periplaneta anericana cockroaches]. Eksperimental’naya psikhologiya [Experimental Psychology (Russia)], 2011, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 28—39 (In Russian; abstr. in Engl.).
  14. Khvatov I.A., Kharitonov A.N. Spetsifika samootrazheniya u vida Achatina fulica [Specifics of self-reflection in Achatina fulica]. Eksperimental’naya psikhologiya [Experimental Psychology (Russia)], 2012, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 96—107 (In Russian; abstr. in Engl.).
  15. Khvatov I.A., Sokolov A.Yu., Kharitonov A.N. Modifying body schemata in skinks Tiliqua gigas. Eksperimental’naya psikhologiya [Experimental Psychology (Russia)], 2016, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 54—71. doi:10.17759/exppsy.2016090305. (In Russ., аbstr. in Engl.)
  16. Khvatov I.A., Sokolov A.Yu., Kharitonov A.N. Вody schemata in snakes Lampropeltis triangulum campbelli. Eksperimental’naya psikhologiya [Experimental Psychology (Russia)], 2015, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 119—138. doi:10.17759/exppsy.2015080209. (In Russ., аbstr. in Engl.)
  17. Khvatov I.A., SokolovA.Yu., Kharitonov A.N., Kulichenkova K.N. Body scheme in rats Rattus norvegicus. Eksperimental’naya psihologiya [Experimental Psychology (Russia)], 2016, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 112—130. doi:10.17759/exppsy.2016090109. (In Russ., аbstr. in Engl.)
  18. Kohler W. Issledovanie intellekta chelovekoobraznykh obez’yan [A Study of Intelligence of Apes]. Moscow, Izd-vo Komakademii Publ., 1930 (In Russian).
  19. Maravita A., Iriki A. Tools for the body (schema). Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2004,vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 79— 86.
  20. Moeller B., Zoppke H. Frings C. What a car does to your perception: Distance evaluations differ from within and outside of a car. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2016, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 781—788. doi: 10.3758/ s13423-015-0954-9
  21. Stolin V.V. Samosoznanie lichnosti [Self-Conscience of Person], Moscow, Izdatel’stvo Moskovskogo Universiteta Publ., 1983 (In Russian).
  22. Tkhostov A.Sh. Psikhologiya telesnosti [Psychology of Body]. Moscow, Smysl Publ., 2002 (In Russian).

Information About the Authors

Ivan A. Khvatov, PhD in Psychology, Head, Center for Research and Education in Biopsychology and Chair of General Psychology, Moscow Institute of Psychoanalysis, Moscow, Russia, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6939-244X, e-mail: ittkrot1@gmail.com

Alexey Y. Sokolov, PhD in Biology, Chief Research Scientist, Center for Science and Educational of Biopsychological Research, Moscow Institute of psychoanalysis, Moscow, Russia, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6927-6473, e-mail: apophis-king@mail.ru

Alexandr N. Kharitonov, PhD in Psychology, Senior Researcher, Institute of Psychology, Russian Academy of Sciences, Scientific and Educational Center for Biopsychological Research, Moscow Institute of Psychoanalysis (NOCHU VO “Moscow Institute of Psychoanalysis”); Leading Researcher at the Center for Experimental Psychology, Moscow State Psychological and Pedagogical University (FSBEI HE MGPPU), Deputy editor-in-chief of the scientific journal "Experimental Psychology", Moscow, Russia, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4801-9937, e-mail: ankhome47@list.ru

Metrics

Views

Total: 1872
Previous month: 11
Current month: 3

Downloads

Total: 598
Previous month: 1
Current month: 0