|
|
Hopkins, W. D., Taglialatela, J. P., & Leavens, D. A. (2007). Chimpanzees differentially produce novel vocalizations to capture the attention of a human. Anim. Behav., 73(2), 281–286.
Abstract: Chimpanzees, Pan troglodytes, produce numerous species-atypical signals when raised in captivity. We examined contextual elements of the use of two of these vocal signals, the `raspberry' and the extended grunt. Our results demonstrate that these vocalizations are not elicited by the presence of food, but instead function as attention-getting signals. These findings reveal a heretofore underappreciated category of animal signals: attention-getting sounds produced in novel environmental circumstances. The invention and use of species-atypical signals, considered in relation to group differences in signalling repertoires in apes in their natural habitats, may index a generative capacity in these hominoid species without obvious corollary in other primate species.
|
|
|
|
Abeyesinghe, S. M., Nicol, C. J., Hartnell, S. J., & Wathes, C. M. (2005). Can domestic fowl, Gallus gallus domesticus, show self-control? Anim. Behav., 70(1), 1–11.
Abstract: An important aspect of cognition is whether animals live exclusively in the present or can anticipate the future. Defined as self-control, the ability to choose a large, remote reinforcer over a small, proximate reinforcer available at the same frequency has been examined in a number of species, often proving difficult to demonstrate. We investigated self-control for food in domestic fowl using a standard two-key operant task and an equivalent two-choice return maze (TCRM) task. When hens chose between a 2-s delay to a 3-s feed access (impulsive) and a 6-s delay to a 7-s feed access (self-control), they appeared unable to discriminate in the TCRM but were impulsive in the operant task. We explored reasons for not choosing self-control in the operant task, first by examining the relation between feed access time and actual feed intake. A second operant experiment examined whether failure to show self-control could be attributed to an inability to combine the delay and access (quantity) reward information associated with choices to reach overall predictions of value. New hens chose between a 2-s delay to a 3-s feed access (impulsive) and either a 22-s delay to a 22-s feed access (standard self-control) or a 6-s delay to a 22-s feed access (jackpot self-control). While hens were impulsive in the standard condition, they showed significant and pronounced self-control in the jackpot condition, eliminating the possibility of an absolute cognitive constraint. Impulsive behaviour can instead be explained by temporal discounting: perceived depreciation of reward value as a function of the uncertainty associated with delay. Implications for welfare are discussed.
|
|
|
|
Bugnyar, T., & Kotrschal, K. (2002). Observational learning and the raiding of food caches in ravens, Corvus corax: is it `tactical' deception? Anim. Behav., 64(2), 185–195.
Abstract: Group-foraging ravens scatter-hoard when they are competing for food and, to some extent, also raid the caches made by others. We investigated the effects of observational spatial memory on individual caching and raiding tactics. With captive ravens, we found visual observation was essential for locating and raiding the caches of conspecifics. Both captive and free-ranging ravens, food cachers as well as potential cache raiders, responded to each other's presence. Cachers withdrew from conspecifics and most often placed their caches behind structures, obstructing the view of potential observers. Raiders watched inconspicuously and kept at a distance to cachers close to their cache sites. In response to the presence of potential raiders or because of their initial movements towards caches, the cachers frequently interrupted caching, changed cache sites, or recovered their food items. These results suggest that ravens, regardless of whether they act as cachers or raiders, are capable of withholding information about their intentions and, hence, manipulate the other bird's attention either to prevent or to achieve social-learning opportunities. Such interactions may qualify as `tactical' deception and may have created a considerable pressure selecting for social cognition in ravens. Copyright 2002 The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
|
|
|
|
Daly, M., & Wilson, M. I. (1999). Human evolutionary psychology and animal behaviour. Anim. Behav., 57(3), 509–519.
Abstract: Homo sapiensis increasingly being studied within the evolutionary (adaptationist, selectionist) framework favoured by animal behaviour researchers. There are various labels for such work, including evolutionary psychology, human behavioural ecology and human sociobiology. Collectively, we call these areas `human evolutionary psychology' (HEP) because their shared objective is an evolutionary understanding of human information processing and decision making. Sexual selection and sex differences have been especially prominent in recent HEP research, but many other topics have been addressed, including parent-offspring relations, reciprocity and exploitation, foraging strategies and spatial cognition. Many HEP researchers began their scientific careers in animal behaviour, and in many ways, HEP research is scarcely distinguishable from other animal behaviour research. Currently controversial issues in HEP, such as the explanation(s) for observed levels of heritable diversity, the kinds of data needed to test adaptationist hypotheses, and the characterization of a species-typical `environment of evolutionary adaptedness', are issues in animal behaviour as well. What gives HEP a distinct methodological flavour is that the research animal can talk, an ability that has both advantages and pitfalls for researchers. The proper use of self-reports and other verbal data in HEP might usefully become a subject of future research in its own right.
|
|
|
|
Heyes, C. M. (1993). Imitation, culture and cognition. Anim. Behav., 46(5), 999–1010.
Abstract: Abstract. This paper examines the significance of imitation in non-human animals with respect to the phylogenetic origins of culture and cognitive complexity. It is argued that both imitation (learning about behaviour through nonspecific observation) and social learning (learning about the environment through conspecific observation) can mediate social transmission of information, and that neither is likely to play an important role in supporting behavioural traditions or culture. Current evidence suggests that imitation is unlikely to do this because it does not insulate information from modification through individual learning in the retention period between acquisition and re-transmission. Although insignificant in relation to culture, imitation apparently involves complex and little-understood cognitive operations. It is unique in requiring animals spontaneously to equate extrinsic visual input with proprioceptive and/or kinaesthetic feedback from their own actions, but not in requiring or implicating self-consciousness, representation, metarepresentation or a capacity for goal-directed action.
|
|
|
|
Walker, S. (1989). An introduction to animal cognition : By . Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum (1988). Pp. viii + 328. Price [pound sign]8.95 paperback. Anim. Behav., 37(Part 3), 521–522.
|
|
|
|
Inglis, I. (1985). H.L. Roitblat, T.G. Bever and H.S. Terrace, Editors, Animal Cognition, Lawrence Erlbaum, New Jersey (1984), p. 682. Anim. Behav., 33(1), 344–345.
|
|
|
|
McFarland, D. J. (1984). Roger L. Mellgren, Editor, Animal Cognition and Behavior, North-Holland, Amsterdam (1983), p. xi. Anim. Behav., 32(2), 634–635.
|
|
|
|
Anderson JR, & Gallup GG. (1997). Self-recognition in Saguinus? A critical essay. Anim. Behav., 54, 1563.
|
|
|
|
Bugnyar T, & Huber L. (1997). Push or pull: an experimental study on imitation in marmosets. Anim. Behav., 54, 817.
|
|
