Dehaene, S., Meyniel, F., Wacongne, C., Wang, L. & Pallier, C. The neural representation of sequences: From transition probabilities to algebraic patterns and linguistic trees. Neuron 88, 2–19 (2015).
Armstrong, B., Frost, R. & Christiansen, M. H. The long road of statistical learning research: Past, present and future. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B. 372, 1711. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2016.0047 (2017).
Santolin, C. & Saffran, J. R. Constraints on statistical learning across species. Trends Cogn. Sci. 22, 52–63 (2018).
Saffran, J. R. & Kirkham, N. Z. Infant statistical learning. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 69, 2.1-2.23 (2018).
Fiser, J. & Aslin, R. N. Statistical learning of new visual feature combinations by infants. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 99, 15822–15826 (2002).
Kirkham, N. Z., Slemmer, J. A. & Johnson, S. P. Visual statistical learning in infancy: Evidence for a domain general learning mechanism. Cognition 83, B35–B42 (2002).
Kirkham, N. Z., Slemmer, J. A., Richardson, D. C. & Johnson, S. P. Location, location, location: Development of spatiotemporal sequence learning in infancy. Child Dev. 78, 1559–1571 (2007).
Marcovitch, S. & Lewkowicz, D. J. Sequence learning in infancy: The independent contributions of conditional probability and pair frequency information. Dev. Sci. 12, 1020–1025 (2009).
Bulf, H., Johnson, S. P. & Valenza, E. Visual statistical learning in the newborn infant. Cognition 121, 127–132 (2011).
Wu, R., Gopnik, A., Richardson, D. C. & Kirkham, N. Z. Infants learn about objects from statistics and people. Dev. Psychol. 47, 1220 (2011).
Tummeltshammer, K. S. & Kirkham, N. Z. Learning to look: Probabilistic variation and noise guide infants’ eye movements. Dev. Sci. 16, 760–771 (2013).
Sonnweber, R., Ravignani, A. & Fitch, W. T. Non-adjacent visual dependency learning in chimpanzees. Anim. Cogn. 18, 733–745 (2015).
Milne, A. E., Wilson, B. & Christiansen, M. H. Structured sequence learning across sensory modalities in humans and nonhuman primates. Curr. Opin. Behav. Sci. 21, 39–48 (2018).
Versace, E., Rogge, J. R., Shelton-May, N. & Ravignani, A. Positional encoding in cotton-top tamarins (Saguinus oedipus). Anim. Cogn. 22, 825–838 (2019).
Rey, A., Perruchet, P. & Fagot, J. Centre-embedded structures are a by-product of associative learning and working memory constraints: Evidence from baboons (Papio papio). Cognition 123, 180–184 (2012).
Malassis, R., Dehaene, S. & Fagot, J. Baboons (Papio papio) process a context-free but not a context-sensitive grammar. Sci. Rep. 10, 1–12 (2020).
Grainger, J., Dufau, S., Montant, M., Ziegler, J. C. & Fagot, J. Orthographic processing in baboons (Papio papio). Science 336, 245–248 (2012).
Scarf, D. et al. Orthographic processing in pigeons (Columba livia). Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 113, 11272–11276 (2016).
Stobbe, N., Westphal-Fitch, G., Aust, U. & Fitch, W. T. Visual artificial grammar learning: Comparative research on humans, kea (Nestor notabilis) and pigeons (Columba livia). Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B. 367, 1995–2006 (2012).
Versace, E. & Vallortigara, G. Origins of knowledge: Insights from precocial species. Front. Behav. Neurosci. 9, 338 (2015).
Versace, E., Martinho-Truswel, A., Kacelnik, A. & Vallortigara, G. Priors in animal and artificial intelligence: Where does learning begin?. Trends Cogn. Sci. 22, 963–965 (2018).
Santolin, C., Rosa-Salva, O., Regolin, L. & Vallortigara, G. Generalization of visual regularities in newly hatched chicks (Gallus gallus). Anim. Cogn. 19, 1007–1017 (2016).
Saffran, J. R., Pollak, S. D., Seibel, R. L. & Shkolnik, A. Dog is a dog is a dog: Infant rule learning is not specific to language. Cognition 105, 669–680 (2007).
Martinho, A. & Kacelnik, A. Ducklings imprint on the relational concept of “same or different”. Science 353, 286–288 (2016).
Rosa-Salva, O. et al. Spontaneous learning of visual structures in domestic chicks. Animals 8, 135 (2018).
Versace, E., Regolin, L., & Vallortigara, G. Emergence of grammar as revealed by visual imprinting in newly-hatched chicks. In EVOLANG6, 457–458 (2006).
Versace, E., Spierings, M. J., Caffini, M., Ten Cate, C. & Vallortigara, G. Spontaneous generalization of abstract multimodal patterns in young domestic chicks. Anim. Cogn. 20, 521–529 (2017).
Santolin, C., Rosa-Salva, O., Vallortigara, G. & Regolin, L. Unsupervised statistical learning in newly hatched chicks. Curr. Biol. 26, R1218–R1220 (2016).
Vallortigara, G. Visual cognition and representation in birds and primates. In Comparative Vertebrate Cognition Vol. 2 (eds Rogers, L. & Kaplan, G.) 57–94 (Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, New York, NY, 2004).
Vallortigara, G. The cognitive chicken: Visual and spatial cognition in a non-mammalian brain. In Comparative Cognition: Experimental Explorations of Animal Intelligence Vol. 1 (eds Wasserman, E. & Zentall, T.) 41–58 (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2006).
Vallortigara, G. Core knowledge of object, number, and geometry: A comparative and neural approach. Cogn. Neuropsychol. 29, 213–236 (2012).
Bateson, P. The characteristics and context of imprinting. Biol. Rev. 41, 177–217 (1966).
Bateson, P. & Jaeckel, J. B. Chicks’ preferences for familiar and novel conspicuous objects after different periods of exposure. Anim. Behav. 24, 386–390 (1976).
Bolhuis, J. Mechanisms of avian imprinting: A review. Biol. Rev. 66, 303–345 (1991).
McCabe, B. Imprinting. WIREs Cogn. Sci. 4, 375–390 (2013).
Miura, M., Nishi, D. & Matsushima, T. Combined predisposed preferences for colour and biological motion make robust development of social attachment through imprinting. Anim. Cogn. 23, 169–188 (2019).
Bateson, P. Is imprinting such a special case?. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B. 329, 125–131 (1990).
Bateson, P. Preferences for familiarity and novelty: A model for the simultaneous development of both. J. Theor. Biol. 41, 249–259 (1973).
Vallortigara, G. Affiliation and aggression as related to gender in domestic chicks (Gallus gallus). J. Comp. Psychol. 106, 53–57 (1992).
Vallortigara, G., Cailotto, M. & Zanforlin, M. Sex differences in social reinstatement motivation of the domestic chick (Gallus gallus) revealed by runway tests with social and nonsocial reinforcement. J. Comp. Psychol. 104, 361–367 (1990).
Cailotto, M., Vallortigara, G. & Zanforlin, M. Sex differences in the response to social stimuli in young chicks. Ethol. Ecol. Evol. 1, 323–327 (1989).
Cailotto, M., Vallortigara, G. & Zanforlin, M. Behavioural differences between male and female domestic chicks (Gallus gallus). Atti e Memorie dell’Accademia Patavina di Scienze, Lettere ed Arti CI 77–92 (1989).
Regolin, L., Tommasi, L. & Vallortigara, G. Visual perception of biological motion in newly hatched chicks as revealed by an imprinting procedure. Anim. Cogn. 3, 53–60 (2000).
Vallortigara, G. & Andrew, R. J. Lateralization of response by chicks to change in a model partner. Anim. Behav. 41, 187–194 (1991).
Versace, E., Fracasso, I., Baldan, G., Dalle Zotte, A. & Vallortigara, G. Newborn chicks show inherited variability in early social predispositions for hen-like stimuli. Sci. Rep. 7, 40296 (2017).
Miura, M. & Matsushima, T. Preference for biological motion in domestic chicks: Sex-dependent effect of early visual experience. Anim. Cogn. 15, 871–879 (2012).
Jones, R. Sex and strain differences in the open field responses of domestic chicks. Appl. Anim. Ethol. 3, 255–261 (1977).
Jones, R. Responses of domestic chicks to novel food as a function of sex, strain and previous experience. Behav. Proc. 16, 261–271 (1986).
Mutibvu, T., Chimonyo, M. & Halimani, T. Effects of strain and sex on the behaviour of free-range slow-growing chickens raised in a hot environment. J. Appl. Anim. Res. 46, 224–231 (2017).
Aslin, R., Saffran, J. & Newport, E. Computation of conditional probability statistics by 8-month-old infants. Psychol. Sci. 9, 321–324 (1998).
Workman, L. & Andrew, R. Simultaneous changes in behaviour and in lateralization during the development of male and female domestic chicks. Anim. Behav. 38, 596–605 (1989).
Vallortigara, G. & Zanforlin, M. Open-field behavior of young chicks (Gallus gallus): Antipredatory responses, social reinstatement motivation, and gender effects. Anim. Learn. Behav. 16, 359–362 (1988).
Rosa-Salva, O., Regolin, L. & Vallortigara, G. Inversion of contrast polarity abolishes spontaneous preferences for face-like stimuli in newborn chicks. Behav. Brain Res. 228, 133–143 (2012).
Wood, S. M., Johnson, S. P. & Wood, J. N. Automated study challenges the existence of a foundational statistical-learning ability in newborn chicks. Psychol. Sci. 30, 1592–1602 (2019).
Bateson, P. How do sensitive periods arise and what are they for?. Anim. Behav. 27, 470–486 (1979).
Bateson, P. Brief exposure to a novel stimulus during imprinting in chicks and its influence on subsequent preferences. Anim. Learn. Behav. 7, 259–262 (1979).
Cherfas, J. & Scott, A. Impermanent reversal of filial imprinting. Anim. Behav. 29, 301 (1981).
Salzen, E. & Meyer, C. Reversibility of imprinting. J. Comp. Physiol. Psychol. 66, 269–275 (1968).
Pitz, G. F. & Ross, R. B. Imprinting as a function of arousal. J. Comp. Physiol. Psychol. 54, 602 (1961).
Lemaire, B. S. No evidence of spontaneous preference for slowly moving objects in visually naïve chicks. Sci. Rep. 10, 6277 (2020).
McBride, G., Parer, I. & Foenander, F. The social organization and behaviour of the feral domestic fowl. Anim. Behav. Monogr. 2, 125–181 (1969).
Josserand, M. & Lemaire, B. S. A step by step guide to using visual field analysis. Protocols https://doi.org/10.17504/protocols.io.bicvkaw6 (2020).
Mathis, A. et al. DeepLabCut: Markerless pose estimation of user-defined body parts with deep learning. Nat. Neurosci. 21, 1281 (2018).
Nath, T. et al. Using DeepLabCut for 3D markerless pose estimation across species and behaviors. Nat. Protoc. 14, 2152–2176 (2019).