|
|
Schloegl, C., Kotrschal, K., & Bugnyar, T. (2008). Modifying the object-choice task: Is the way you look important for ravens? Behav. Process., 77(1), 61–65.
Abstract: Most animals seem to have difficulties in using gaze cues to find hidden food in object-choice tasks. For instance, chimpanzees usually fail in these tests, even though they are capable of following other's gaze geometrically behind barriers. Similar to chimpanzees, common ravens are skilled in tracking other's gaze but fail in object-choice tasks. We here explored whether procedural modifications, which had been used successfully in chimpanzees, would also yield positive results in ravens. In our modifications (a) the experimenter approached the cup while gazing at it, (b) the gaze cue was accompanied by a sound and (c) the experimenter could actually see the food while giving the gaze cue. Two out of seven birds performed above chance level in some of these conditions. However, we ascribe this improvement to the individuals' learning ability rather than to an understanding of the communicative nature of the task. This interpretation is further supported by results of a follow-up experiment suggesting that ravens may not rely on conspecifics' gaze cues for finding food caches in a natural foraging context. In sum, our results suggest that ravens may not transfer their gaze follow abilities to foraging situations involving hidden food.
|
|
|
|
Smith, B., & Litchfield, C. (2010). Dingoes (Canis dingo) can use human social cues to locate hidden food. Anim. Cogn., 13(2), 367–376.
Abstract: Abstract There is contention concerning the role that domestication plays in the responsiveness of canids to human social cues, with most studies investigating abilities of recognized domestic dog breeds or wolves. Valuable insight regarding the evolution of social communication with humans might be gained by investigating Australian dingoes, which have an early history of domestication, but have been free-ranging in Australia for approximately 3500–5000 years. Seven ‘pure’ dingoes were tested outdoors by a familiar experimenter using the object-choice paradigm to determine whether they could follow nine human communicative gestures previously tested with domestic dogs and captive wolves. Dingoes passed all cues significantly above control, including the “benchmark” momentary distal pointing, with the exception of gaze only, gaze and point, and pointing from the incorrect location. Dingo performance appears to lie somewhere between wolves and dogs, which suggests that domestication may have played a role in their ability to comprehend human gestures.
|
|
