Cookies Policy

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

I accept this policy

Find out more here

Effects of Primary Imprinting On the Subsequent Development of Secondary Filial Attachments in the Chick

No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.

Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the BrillOnline platform automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the Library. Brill MyBook is a print-on-demand paperback copy which is sold at a favorably uniform low price.

Access this article

+ Tax (if applicable)
Add to Favorites
You must be logged in to use this functionality

image of Behaviour

This study reinvestigates the effects of primary imprinting of chicks with either a naturalistic stimulus or an artificial object on subsequent imprinting with artificial objects. Initial experience with a live chick (group C) or a yellow cylinder (group Y) had differential effects on the development of a secondary filial attachment in chicks. In chicks of both groups, growth of attachment to the novel imprinting object manifested itself rather abruptly, but the change in response to the novel object occurred later in C- than in Y-chicks. There was no difference between the groups in the outcome of secondary imprinting: chicks in groups C and Y eventually became equally strongly attached to their novel imprinting stimulus, and when exposed to a third object, chicks in both groups imprinted equally well on this object. Thus, (1) initial imprinting on a naturalistic stimulus postponed, but did not block secondary imprinting on an artificial object, and (2) within the lengths of exposure used, the capacity to form new filial attachments was not limited, contrary to the prediction of the competitive exclusion model for imprinting. Secondary imprinting was delayed for a longer time when chicks were exposed to the novel imprinting stimulus in an unfamiliar environment. This indicates that induction of fear in chicks interfered with the occurrence of secondary imprinting. This effect may havc contributed to the difference between groups C and Y in the length of delay of secondary imprinting. Possibly, separation from the first stimulus and exposure to the second stimulus was more fearful to C-chicks than to Y-chicks. Introduction Imprinting was originally described by LORENZ (1935, 1937) as an irreversible process. This does not necessarily mean that a young animal cannot form secondary filial attachments after having been imprinted on a

Affiliations: 1: (Zoological Laboratory, University of Groningen, P.O. Box 14, 9750 AA Haren, The Netherlands


Full text loading...


Data & Media loading...

Article metrics loading...



Can't access your account?
  • Tools

  • Add to Favorites
  • Printable version
  • Email this page
  • Subscribe to ToC alert
  • Get permissions
  • Recommend to your library

    You must fill out fields marked with: *

    Librarian details
    Your details
    Why are you recommending this title?
    Select reason:
    Behaviour — Recommend this title to your library
  • Export citations
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation