Growing evidence shows that dogs can complete complex behavioral tasks, such as learning labels for hundreds of objects, readily learning the name of a novel object, and responding differentially to objects by category (e.g., “toy,” “ball,” “Frisbee”). We expand here on the evidence for complex behavioral abilities in dogs by demonstrating that they are capable of concept formation by strict criteria. A German shepherd responded differentially to two sets of objects (“toys” and “non-toys”) in Experiment 1. Additionally, the dog’s differential responding in Experiment 1 occurred from the first trial, indicating that he entered the experiment with this stimulus class already differentiated from his day-to-day exposure to contingencies. In Experiment 2 we used a common response (tug-of-war) with three objects that were not retrieved in Experiment 1 to attempt to add these objects to the stimulus class. After repeated sessions of tug-of-war, the dog began retrieving all three objects in the retrieval test, although the rates of retrieval varied between objects. Finally, in Experiment 3, we conducted a transfer of function test in which the dog emitted a new response to untrained exemplars suggesting that his differential responding in Experiment 1 was indicative of a concept by the strictest criteria. Additionally, he reliably emitted the new response in the transfer test to one of the three new objects from Experiment 2, suggesting this object had been reliably added to the conceptual class.

The Keynote Speaker at Winter Conference on Animal Learning and Behavior (WCALB) 2014 was Dr. Björn Brembs whose address was titled, Pavlovian and Skinnerian Processes Are Genetically Separable.  The essence of the address, that describes the research on which Dr. Brembs based this conclusion, is described below.  Articles in this issue representing the related Focus Session include:  The Many Faces of Pavlovian Conditioning by Dr. Jozefowiez, Pavlov + Skinner = Premack by Dr. Killeen, Evocation of Behavioral Change by the Reinforcer is the Critical Event in Both the Classical and Operant Procedures by Dr. Donahoe, On Choice and the Law of Effect by Dr. Staddon, Response-Outcome versus Outcome-Response Associations in Pavlovian-to-Instrumental Transfer:  Effects of Instrumental Training Context by Gilroy, Everett and Delamater, and The Instrumentally-Derived Incentive-Motivational Function by Dr. Weiss.  As a whole, they attempt to increase our contact with, and get at the essence of, what is actually happening with these operant and classical contingencies in the laboratory and nature.  The Research Seminar Session revealed the current tendency for explanations of behavior to be reduced to physiology, neuroscience, and genetics.  However, anti-reductionists saw shortcomings in this approach.  They recommended an interconnected holistic approach which shifts the focus away from the structure of discrete behaviors and toward examining the environment in which the behavior occurs and the consequences produced.  The distinction between structural and functional analysis points to a difficulty of integrating facts about behavior with other levels of analysis that requires our attention.