At 10:41 AM -0500 12/3/99, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Last night on the news, one of the networks (Dan Rather, I think) did a
>piece on airport security in which they found dogs to be 100% accurate in
>sniffing out guns in baggage (I believe; since I was only patially
>attending, I am not necessarily a reliable eyewitness to this). They were
>far superior to the fancy security devices that were being monitored by
>minimum wage, poorly trained security people.
Can you say "Clever Hans"?
>On a related topic, I remember from an industrial psychology class a
>reference to research showing that pigeons were superior at removing flawed
>phamaceuticals from an assembly line than were humans. The company did not
>implement a pigeon quality review team, though, because of image concerns.
>Is there a grain of truth in any of this? I would like to use it as an
>example of discrimination learning if I can verify it.
This one's real:
Verhave,T. (1966). The pigeon as a quality control inspector. _American
Psychologist_, _21_, 109-115.
* PAUL K. BRANDON [EMAIL PROTECTED] *
* Psychology Dept Minnesota State University, Mankato *
* 23 Armstrong Hall, Mankato, MN 56001 ph 507-389-6217 *
* http://www.mankato.msus.edu/dept/psych/welcome.html *
