Endpoint distinctiveness facilitates analogical mapping in pigeons

• We investigated if pigeons benefit from a shared relational mapping of two dimensions.
• A dimensionally mapped group performed better than a random group at several points.
• It appeared that endpoint distinctiveness facilitated this common mapping advantage.
• Difficulty in perceiving shared relations may limit analogical thinking in pigeons.

Analogical thinking necessitates mapping shared relations across two separate domains. We investigated whether pigeons could learn faster with ordinal mapping of relations across two physical dimensions (circle size & choice spatial position) relative to random mapping of these relations. Pigeons were trained to relate six circular samples of different sizes to horizontally positioned choice locations in a six alternative matching-to-sample task. Three pigeons were trained in a mapped condition in which circle size mapped directly onto choice spatial position. Three other pigeons were trained in a random condition in which the relations between size and choice position were arbitrarily assigned. The mapped group showed an advantage over the random group in acquiring this task. In a subsequent second phase, relations between the dimensions were ordinally reversed for the mapped group and re-randomized for the random group. There was no difference in how quickly matching accuracy re-emerged in the two groups, although the mapped group eventually performed more accurately. Analyses suggested this mapped advantage was likely due to endpoint distinctiveness and the benefits of proximity errors during choice responding rather than a conceptual or relational advantage attributable to the common or ordinal mapping of the two dimensions. This potential difficulty in mapping relations across dimensions may limit the pigeons’ capacity for more advanced types of analogical reasoning.This article is part of a Special Issue entitled: Tribute to Tom Zentall.