Simulated maternal care facilitates the formation of filial imprinting in domestic chicks

in Behaviour
Restricted Access
Get Access to Full Text
Rent on DeepDyve

Have an Access Token?

Enter your access token to activate and access content online.

Please login and go to your personal user account to enter your access token.


Have Institutional Access?

Access content through your institution. Any other coaching guidance?


The potential effects of maternal care-related stimuli on imprinting in domestic chicks were examined. In the first phase, one group of chicks received a simulated brooding experience with a primary imprinting object during two training sessions, whereas chicks in another group received exposure to the object without being brooded. In subsequent testing, the brooded chicks showed a robust preference for the primary imprinting object, whereas the non-brooded chicks showed a weaker preference for the object. In the second phase, one group of chicks was exposed to a secondary imprinting object associated with a feeding opportunity, whereas another group received exposure to the object in the absence of such an experience. In subsequent testing, the fed chicks showed a strong preference for the secondary imprinting object, whereas the non-fed chicks showed no preference. These results suggest that stimuli experienced through usual maternal care may be an important factor in filial imprinting.



AokiI. (1985). Long-term retention of the conditioned food-getting response in carps. — Ann. Anim. Psychol. 34: 87-94.

BatesonP.P.G. (1966). The characteristics and context of imprinting. — Biol. Rev. 41: 177-220.

BolhuisJ.J. (1991). Mechanisms of avian imprinting: a review. — Biol. Rev. 66: 303-345.

BolhuisJ.J.HoneyR.C. (1994). Within-event learning during filial imprinting. — J. Exp. Psychol.: Anim. Behav. Process. 20: 240-248.

BolhuisJ.J.TroosterW.J. (1988). Reversibility revisited: stimulus-dependent stability of filial preference in the chick. — Anim. Behav. 36: 668-674.

BoydH.FabriciusE. (1965). Observations on the incidence of following of visual and auditory stimuli in naïve mallard ducklings (Anas platyrhynchos). — Behaviour 25: 1-15.

BrownR.T. (1974). Following and visual imprinting in ducklings across a wide age range. — Dev. Psychobiol. 8: 27-33.

ClementsM.LienJ. (1975). Effects of tactile stimulation on the initiation and maintenance of the following response in Japanese quail (Coturnix coturnix japonica). — Anim. Learn. Behav. 3: 301-304.

ColliasN.E. (1952). The development of social behaviour in birds. — Auk 69: 127-159.

CunninghamC.L.OstroffR.L.HarrisD.F. (1989). Thermoregulation and performance of heat-reinforced autoshaped keypecking in chicks. — Behav. Neural Biol. 51: 54-72.

de VosG.J.van KampenH.S. (1993). Effects of primary imprinting on the subsequent development of secondary filial attachments in the chick. — Behaviour 125: 245-263.

DollardJ.MillerN.E. (1950). Personality and psychotherapy. — McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.

DyerA.B.LickliterR.GottliebG. (1989). Maternal and peer imprinting in mallard ducklings under experimentally simulated natural social conditions. — Dev. Psychobiol. 22: 463-475.

EisererL.A. (1978). The effects of tactile stimulation on imprinting in ducklings after the sensitive period. — Anim. Learn. Behav. 6: 27-29.

FabriciusE.BoydH. (1954). Experiments on the following-reaction of ducklings. — Rept. Wildfowl Trust 6: 84-89.

GaioniS.J.HoffmanH.S.DePauloP.StrattonV.N. (1978). Imprinting in older ducklings: some tests of a reinforcement model. — Anim. Learn. Behav. 6: 19-26.

GewirtzJ.L. (1961). A learning analysis of the effects of normal stimulation, privation and deprivation on the acquisition of social motivation and attachment. — In: Determinants of infant behaviour ( FoxB.M., ed.). Methuen, London, p.  213-299.

GravesH.B.SiegelP.B. (1968). Prior experience and the approach response in domestic chicks. — Anim. Behav. 16: 18-23.

GuitonP. (1959). Socialisation and imprinting in brown leghorn chicks. — Anim. Behav. 7: 26-34.

GvaryahuG.SnapirN.RobinzonB. (1988). Pecking: another measurement for filial attachment in group-reared domestic fowl chicks. — Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 21: 357-362.

HessE.H. (1973). Imprinting: early experience and the developmental psychobiology of attachment. — Van Nostrand-Reinhold, New York, NY.

HoffmanH.S.RatnerA.M. (1973). A reinforcement model of imprinting: implications for socialization in monkeys and men. — Psychol. Rev. 80: 527-544.

HoffmanH.S.RatnerA.M.EisererL.A. (1972). Role of visual imprinting in the emergence of specific filial attachments in ducklings. — J. Comp. Physiol. Psychol. 81: 399-409.

HoganJ.A. (1974). Responses in Pavlovian conditioning studies. — Science 186: 156-157.

HoganJ.A.AbelE.L. (1971). Effects of social factors on response to unfamiliar environments in Gallus gallus spadiceus. — Anim. Behav. 19: 687-694.

HoneyR.C.BatesonP. (1996). Stimulus comparison and perceptual learning: further evidence and evaluation from an imprinting procedure. — Q. J. Exp. Psychol. 49B: 259-269.

HoneyR.C.BolhuisJ.J. (1997). Imprinting, conditioning, and within-event learning. — Q. J. Exp. Psychol. 50B: 97-110.

JamesH. (1960). Social inhibition of the domestic chick’s response to visual flicker. — Anim. Behav. 8: 223-224.

JaynesJ. (1956). Imprinting: the interaction of learned and innate behavior. I. Development and generalisation. — J. Comp. Physiol. Psychol. 49: 201-206.

JohnsonM.H.BolhuisJ.J.HornG. (1985). Interaction between acquired preferences and developing predispositions during imprinting. — Anim. Behav. 33: 1000-1006.

JonesR.B.WilliamsJ.B. (1992). Responses of pair-housed male and females domestic chicks to the removal of a companion. — Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 32: 375-380.

KentJ.P. (1987). Experiments on the relationships between the hen and chick (Gallus gallus): the role of the auditory mode in recognition and the effects of maternal separation. — Behaviour 102: 1-14.

LickliterR.GottliebG. (1986). Training ducklings in broods interferes with maternal imprinting. — Dev. Psychobiol. 19: 555-566.

LorenzK. (1935). Der Kumpan in der Umwelt des Vogels. — J. Ornithol. 83: 137-213, 289-413.

LorenzK. (1937). Über den Begriff der Instinkthandlung. — Folia Biotheor. 2: 17-50.

LorenzK. (1981). The foundations of ethology. — Springer, New York, NY.

MarxG.LeppeltJ.EllendorffF. (2001). Vocalisations in chicks (Gallus gallus dom.) during stepwise social isolation. — Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 75: 61-74.

McCabeB.J. (2013). Imprinting. — Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Cogn. Sci. 4: 375-390.

MoltzH.RosenblumL.A. (1958). Imprinting and associative learning: the stability of the following response in Peking ducks (Anas platyrhynchos). — J. Comp. Physiol. Psychol. 51: 580-583.

MoltzH.RosenblumL.StettnerL.J. (1960). Some parameters of imprinting effectiveness. — J. Comp. Physiol. Psychol. 53: 297-301.

MoriyamaT. (2004). The phylogeny and ontogeny in imprinting. — Tokiwa J. Hum. Sci. 12: 13-27.

PearJ.J. (2014). The science of learning. — Psychology Press, Philadelphia, PA.

PoltJ.M.HessE.H. (1964). Following and imprinting: effects of light and social experience. — Science 143: 1185-1187.

RajeckiD.W.IvinsB.ReinB. (1976). Social discrimination and aggressive pecking in domestic chicks. — J. Comp. Physiol. Psychol. 90: 442-452.

RiedstraB.GroothuisT.G.G. (2002). Early feather pecking as a form of social exploration: the effect of group stability on feather pecking and tonic immobility in domestic chicks. — App. Anim. Behav. Sci. 77: 127-138.

SalzenE.A. (1969). Contact and social attachment in domestic chicks. — Behaviour 33: 38-51.

SalzenE.A. (1970). Imprinting and environmental learning. — In: Development and evolution of behavior ( AronsonL.R.TobachE.LehrmanD.S.RosenblattJ.S., eds). Freeman, San Francisco, CA, p.  158-178.

SalzenE.A.MeyerC.C. (1968). Reversibility of imprinting. — J. Comp. Physiol. Psychol. 66: 269-275.

SalzenE.A.SluckinW. (1959). The incidence of the following response and the duration of the responsiveness in domestic fowl. — Anim. Behav. 7: 172-179.

SherryD.F. (1981). Parental care and the development of thermoregulation in red jungle fowl. — Behaviour 76: 250-279.

SluckinW. (1972). Imprinting and early learning. — Methuen, London.

SluckinW.SalzenE.A. (1961). Imprinting and perceptual learning. — Q. J. Exp. Psychol. 8: 65-77.

SluckinW.TaylorK.F.TaylorA. (1966). Approach of domestic chicks to stationary objects of different texture. — Percept. Mot. Skills 22: 699-702.

SluckinW.BerrymanJ.C.MayesA.MannD. (1979). Chicks’ responses to familiar stimuli in unfamiliar environments. — Q. J. Exp. Psychol. 31: 701-710.

SuzukiT.MoriyamaT. (1999). Contingency of food reinforcement is necessary for maintenance of imprinted responses in chicks. — Jpn. J. Anim. Psychol. 49: 139-156.

TaylorA.SluckinW.HewittR.GuikonP. (1967). The formation of attachments by domestic chicks to two textures. — Anim. Behav. 15: 514-519.

ten CateC. (1986). Does behavior contingent stimulus movement enhance filial imprinting in Japanese quail?. — Dev. Psychobiol. 19: 607-614.

ten CateC. (1989). Stimulus movement, hen behaviour and filial imprinting in Japanese quail (Coturnix coturnix japonica). — Ethology 82: 287-306.

TomieA.SpartaD.R.SilbermanY.InterlandiJ.MynkoA.Patterson-BuckendahlP.PohoreckyL.A. (2002). Pairings of ethanol sipper with food induces Pavlovian autohaping of ethanol drinking in rats: evidence of long-term retention and effects of sipper duration. — Alcohol Alcohol. 37: 547-554.

TomieA.KuoT.AporK.R.SalomonK.E.PohoreckyL.A. (2004). Autoshaping induces ethanol drinking in nondeprived rats: evidence of long-term retention but not induction of ethanol preference. — Pharmacol. Biochem. Behav. 77: 797-804.

TownS.M. (2011). The effects of social rearing on preferences formed during filial imprinting and their neural correlates. — Exp. Brain Res. 212: 575-581.

VallortigaraG. (1992). Right hemisphere advantage for social recognition in the chick. — Neuropsychologia 30: 761-768.

WassermanE.A. (1973). Pavlovian conditioning with heat reinforcement produces stimulus-directed pecking in chicks. — Science 181: 875-877.

WassermanE.A.HunterN.B.GutowskiK.A.BaderS.A. (1975). Autoshaping chicks with heat reinforcement: the role of stimulus-reinforcer and response-reinforcer relations. — J. Exp. Psychol.: Anim. Behav. Process. 1: 158-169.

WoodruffG.StarrM.D. (1978). Autoshaping of initial feeding and drinking reactions in newly hatched chicks. — Anim. Learn. Behav. 6: 265-272.

ZajoncR.B.WilsonW.R.RajeckiD.W. (1975). Affiliation and social discrimination produced by brief exposure in day-old domestic chicks. — Anim. Behav. 23: 131-138.

ZolmanJ.F. (1968). Discrimination learning in the young chick with heat reinforcement. — Psychol. Rec. 18: 303-309.

ZolmanJ.F.ChandlerS.D.BlackD. (1972). Visual discrimination learning of the young chick: key-peck conditioning with heat-light reinforcement. — Dev. Psychobiol. 5: 181-187.


  • (Left) Median preference scores for the brooded and non-brooded chicks in Tests 1 and 2 (Phase 1); (right) median preference scores for the fed and non-fed chicks in Test 3 (Phase 2). Error bars represent ±95% confidence intervals. Scores are expressed as a preference for the familiar training object.

    View in gallery


Content Metrics

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 4 4 3
Full Text Views 4 4 4
PDF Downloads 0 0 0
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0