English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

In 4 experiments, rats searched for food located on top of 4 of 16 towers which were arranged in a 4 × 4 matrix. The location of the baited towers was cued by visual landmark cues (the baited towers were striped, the others white) and by pattern cues (the baited towers were located in a 2 × 2 pattern within the larger 4 × 4 matrix) or simply by pattern cues without visual landmark cues. In 3 of the experiments, visual cues, after being paired with pattern cues, were removed altogether (Experiment 1), put into competition with pattern cues (Experiment 2), or made noninformative (Experiment 3). In Experiment 4, it was the pattern cues that were made noninformative. Collectively, the data suggest strongly that whereas the pattern is learned, even when presumably more salient visual cues are present, the connection between pattern and food location is much weaker than that between visual cue and food location. These data are more easily explained by a model of learning that includes dedicated modules than by a single-system associative model.

Pattern Cue and Visual Cue Competition in a Foraging Task by Rats