‘Animal Intelligence’ Category

2011 Research in Review

Monday, February 6th, 2012

Contributed by Alina Lilova

2011 seems to have been an exciting year for research in animal behaviour and welfare.

image from http://www.chickencare.net/

More studies emerged that found evidence of empathy in nonhuman species. Empathy is the ability to put yourself in someone else’s shoes, to feel his or her emotions. Scientists in Britain, cited by the Telegraph, found that when mother hens see their chicks experience something scary (having their feathers ruffled with puffs of air), they display the same signs of distress as the little chicks themselves. Meanwhile, a research group from the University of Chicago found that rats not only get “infected” by a trapped cagemate’s anxiety, but also gradually learn how to free their friend, with no training at all, and will choose to open his door rather than eat chocolate. (more…)

Sneaky Dogs and Queens of the Street (or How to Read the Mind of Your Human)

Monday, November 21st, 2011

Lika Yanko - Self-Potrait with a Dog, 1962

Contributed by Alina Lilova

It is no secret to anyone who has ever lived with a pet dog that man’s best friend is a highly social, adaptable and intelligent animal. Both scientific studies and countless personal anecdotes demonstrate without a doubt the canine capacity for experiencing a wide range of emotions, and also for reasoning – and none of it is a surprise, given the dog’s unique position over the millennia as a responsive companion and working partner. Dogs may lack the problem-solving abilities for survival in the wild (compared to wolves, e.g.), but they possess excellent acumen for thriving in their particular ecological niche: the human jungle.

(more…)

Clever Birds Challenge Us Not to Parrot Old Beliefs

Friday, April 2nd, 2010

Contributed by Alina Lilova

African grey parrot, photo by Michael Gwyther-Jones

What is going on in the mind of an African Grey who mimics human speech? Is he little more than a voice recorder that “parrots” whatever you say? Some people still hold on to the old belief in the “dumb bird,” but over the years plenty of evidence has accumulated that points to the very opposite.

Early scientific attempts to test the language abilities of birds failed—not because the birds didn’t live up to the hype, but because researchers underestimated them. In the mid-twentieth century, mynah birds took part in studies where they would hear human speech on tape while housed in sound-proof boxes. The mynah birds learnt nothing despite the food rewards. That is, the experimental subjects learnt nothing: their buddies who were kept as pets in the laboratory, listening to the natural flow of human conversation, talked loads. It turned out that just like natural song learning, the retention of words needed a social context, with someone real to imitate.

A social context was provided to African grey parrots trained by Todt and subsequently Pepperberg. Their techniques involved two humans talking to each other, and proved much more successful. Irene Pepperberg’s famous parrot Alex (1976-2007) knew the vocabulary for different shapes, colours and materials. He could also answer the questions “What’s different?” and “What’s same?” about two unfamiliar objects — the shape, the colour, or the “matter,” pronounced “mah-mah” — as well as questions like “What object is round?” or “What object is bigger?”. Alex was also clever enough to know when to answer “None.” Similarly, he could use the numbers from 1 to 7 in a meaningful fashion and had a concept of zero. He used and understood about 100 English words and even invented a new one, “banerry” to mean “apple” (because he already knew the words for “banana” and “cherry”). Another famous African grey parrot, N’kisi, similarly used “flied” for “flew” and once said “pretty smell medicine” to mean his owner’s aromatherapy oils. Such innovative use of words points to some genuine understanding of vocabulary and grammar taking place in the psittacine brain.

When Virginia Morell, author of the article “Minds of Their Own” which appeared in National Geographic, visited Dr. Pepperberg a few years ago, she witnessed Alex practicing on his own, without the need of constant treats and encouragement. She also saw him tell off other parrots when they mispronounced words, and occasionally he would deliberately give a wrong answer to a question, as a joke, just to be contrary. It is only natural, she writes, that a species of such longevity and complexity of social organisation would have to rely on more than just instinct to survive.

Even more interesting—and certainly more controversial—is the telepathy research with N’kisi, who was mentioned above. His owner, Aimée Morgana, has recorded hundreds of bizarre telepathic incidents. For example, once, when she was in a room on a different floor but could hear N’kisi, she happened to look at the image of a beautiful purple car. She was marvelling at the colour when she heard the parrot upstairs say, “Oh wow, look at the pretty purple.” Scientist Rupert Sheldrake helped Morgana test N’kisi in a formal experiment. Morgana was looking at photographs which corresponded to some key words of N’kisi’s vocabulary. In the meantime, the parrot was recorded as he talked in another room, and his speech was subsequently interpreted by three independent transcribers. It turned out he’d scored far more “hits” than would be expected by chance. The methodology was criticised, as always in paranormal research, but that doesn’t make the study any less worthy of attention.

But if parrots can reason, joke and even ‘read minds,’ would they make great pets? I’m not sure, though I have never owned one. They seem to be like human children who need to be brought up very carefully and educated over long years. Like teenagers, even. At 31, Alex died relatively young, and Dr. Pepperberg said that he’d lately become “moody” and “like a teenage son.” (Interestingly, chimpanzee expert Jane Goodall also talks about how difficult, even dangerous, chimps become in their teen years—and how unwise it would be to keep one as a pet.)

Alex changed forever the way people would view parrots, but Dr. Pepperberg’s training and research took many years and a huge effort, and on the downside, this bird lived his whole life in captivity. He had a favourite elm tree that he loved to look at through the window. He would say, “Wanna go tree,” and perch on Dr. Pepperberg’s hand to go to the hallway for a taste of the green wilderness that was never to be his home.

Sources:

Griffin, Donald R. (2001). Animal Minds: Beyond Cognition to Consciousness. The University of Chicago Press, pp. 180-186.

Morell, Virginia (March 2008). “Minds of their own.” National Geographic.

Sheldrake, Rupert and Aimée Morgana (2003). Testing a language-using parrot for telepathy. Journal of Scientific Exploration, Vol. 17, No. 4, pp. 601-616.

Counting Rats?

Monday, March 29th, 2010

Contributed by, Nicola Gothard

It can be difficult for us to understand what goes on in the minds of other animals because at first they appear so different and let’s face it, it can be hard enough to work out what other people are thinking unless they tell us! So, researchers have to find ingenious methods of doing just that.

In one study, researchers put themselves in a rats ‘shoes’ to devise an experiment that would show them if rats count. They thought about the types of situations in which rats might find counting useful. Rats are nocturnal animals that find their way around largely by touch, smell and hearing. So, they devised a system of 6 tunnels arranged in a row along the side of a box. All of the tunnels had food in but their were hatches stopping the rats accesing the food in 5 out of the 6 boxes. The rats were split in to 3 groups; Group 1 rats could eat the food in tunnel 3, Group 2 rats could eat the food in tunnel 4, group 3 rats could eat the food in tunnel 5.  New tubes were used every time so that they couldn’t identify the current tunnel number by scent and swing doors prevented them from seeing which tunnels were blocked and the distance between each tunnel was changed at random. So, the only way the rats could find the correct tunnel number would be to count from the starting hatch.

The rats all successfully learnt which tunnel their food was in very quickly. The tunnel 5 rats were particuarly interesting because they went all the way to the end of tunnel 6 and then went back one tunnel to arrive at tunnel 5. Then they made it even more difficult by putting some of the tunnels around a corner but even then the rats went to the correct tunnel number.

It seems that the rats were using a form of counting between 1 and 4 to identify the ordinal positions of the tunnels. They certainly appeared to have an abstract internal representation of the world!

Source

Dawkins, M.S. (1998) Through Our Eyes Only. Oxford University Press. Pp 43-52.

Fish have feelings too

Saturday, March 27th, 2010

Contributed by, Nicola Gothard

Even as late as the eighties, surgeons operated on new born human infants without anaesthetic wrongly believing them not to feel pain because of their age. This view is still widely believed when it comes to young animals, for example new born sheep are castrated and tail-docked and chicks are beak-trimmed. However the science has proven that young animals do feel pain and this view is slowly changing. Now science has asked the same question of fish and the evidence once again proves that they too have feelings and are capable of experiencing pain and suffering. This may come as a surprise to many, even some ‘vegetarians’ believed it was ok to eat fish because they don’t have any feelings.

Mammals have special pain detectors in their skin known as nociceptors. The nociceptors transmit signals to the brain when pain occurs. It is now known that fish have these pain detectors too.

Not even this was enough to silence the skeptics though. They argue that just because fish feel pain, it doesn’t mean they experience it consciously. However recent experiments by Dr Peter Laming, have gone some way to answering this criticism. He showed that a fully developed pain ‘pathway’ is present in goldfish, linking receptors in the skin, via the spinal cord, to the brain.

We don’t know how to tell for certain whether other humans are consciously aware let alone animals of other species. For both human and non-human animals we can only look for behavioural clues that suggest that others are conscious. Fish have been shown to display behavioural signs that they are not just sensing pain but also experiencing it. Dr Braithwaite has shown that fish which have been injected with ‘painful’ stimulants around the mouth react very differently to those that have not – rubbing the affected area and losing interest in their food until the poison had worn off.


Fish are not a stupid as ’some’ thought either. Scientists in Madrid have discovered that goldfish have the ability to learn and remember their way around mazes. And male cichlids, aggressive freshwater tropical fish, have been found to be able to gauge the fighting abilities of potential rivals simply by watching earlier bouts. This ability – to create a mental ranking – is called transitive inference, and humans cannot do it until they are four years old.

This is an amusing video of a school of goldfish following the instructions of their human trainer.


Source

Braithwaite, V (2010) Do fish feel pain. Oxford University Press.