What do rooks (Corvus frugilegus) understand about physical contact?

Journal of Comparative Psychology

Volumn 120, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 288-293

  Helme, Anne E ^a   Clayton, Nicola S ^a,b   Emery, Nathan J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

^b UK   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Contact; Corvid; Folk physics; Rapid learning; Rook

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL; APPETITE; ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; AWARENESS; BIRD; COMPREHENSION; CONCEPT FORMATION; FEMALE; KINESTHESIA; LEARNING; MALE; ORIENTATION; PHYSICAL PHENOMENA; PHYSICS; PROBLEM SOLVING; PROPRIOCEPTION; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE;

ANIMALS; APPETITIVE BEHAVIOR; AWARENESS; BIRDS; COMPREHENSION; CONCEPT FORMATION; CUES; FEMALE; KINESTHESIS; MALE; ORIENTATION; PHYSICAL PHENOMENA; PHYSICS; PROBLEM SOLVING; PROPRIOCEPTION; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; TRANSFER (PSYCHOLOGY);

EID: 33747370864     PISSN: 07357036     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/0735-7036.120.3.288     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Cramp, S., & Perrins, C. M. (Eds.) (1994). Handbook of the birds of Europe, the Middle East, and North Africa: The birds of the Western Palearctic: Vol. VIII. Crows to finches (pp. 151-171). New York: Oxford University Press.
2. Cummins-Sebree, S. E., & Fragaszy, D. M. (2005). Choosing and using tools: Capuchins (Cebus apella) use a different metric than tamarins (Sanguinus oedipus). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 119, 210-219.
3. Emery, N. J. (2004). Are corvids "feathered apes"? Cognitive evolution in crows, jays, rooks and jackdaws. In S. Walanabe (Ed.), Comparative analysis of minds (pp. 181-213). Tokyo: Keio University Press.
4. Fujita, K., Kuroshima, H., & Asai, S. (2003). How do tufted capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) understand causality involved in tool use? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 29, 233-242.
5. Funk, M. S. (2002). Problem solving skills in young yellow-crowned parakeets (Cyanoramphus auriceps). Animal Cognition, 5, 167-176.
6. Goodwin, D. (1976). Crows of the world. London: British Museum (Natural History).
7. Hansell, M. H. (2000). Bird nests and construction behaviour. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
8. Hauser, M. D. (1997). Primate understanding of functional design features. Cognition, 64, 285-308.
9. Hauser, M. D., Kralik, J., & Botto-Mahan, C. (1999). Problem solving and functional design features: Experiments on cotton-top tamarins, Saguinus oedipus. Animal Behaviour, 57, 565-582.
10. Heinrich, B. (1995). An experimental investigation of insight in common ravens (Corvus corax). The Auk, 112, 994-1003.
11. Humphrey. N. K. (1976). The social function of intellect. In P. P. G. Bateson & R. A. Hinde (Eds.), Growing Points in Ethology (pp. 303-317). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
12. Lefebvre, L., Nicolakakis, N., & Boire, D. (2002). Tools and brains in birds. Behaviour, 139, 939-973.
13. Lefebvre, L., Reader, S. M., & Sol, D. (2004). Brains, innovations and evolution in birds and primates. Brain, Behavior and Evolution, 63, 233-246.
14. Limongelli, L., Boysen, S. T., & Visalberghi, E. (1995). Comprehension of cause effect relations in a tool-using task by chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 109, 18-26.
15. Nicolakakis, N., & Lefebvre, L. (2000). Forebrain size and innovation rate in European birds: Feeding, nesting and confounding variables. Behaviour, 137, 1415-1429.
16. Osthaus, B., Lea, S. E. G., & Slater. A. M. (2005). Dogs (Canis lupus familiaris) fail to show understanding of means end connections in a string-pulling task. Animal Cognition, 8, 37-47.
17. Povinelli, D. J. (2000). Folk physics for apes. New York: Oxford University Press.
18. Reader. S. M., & Laland. K. N. (2002). Social intelligence, innovation and advanced brain size in primates. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 99, 4436-4441.
19. Santos, L. R., Miller, C. T., & Hauser, M. D. (2003). Representing tools: How two non-human primate species distinguish between the functionally relevant and irrelevant features of a tool. Animal Cognition, 6, 269-281.
20. Seed. A. M., Tebbich, S., Emery, N. J., & Clayton, N. S. (in press). Investigating physical cognition in rooks (Corvus frugitegus). Current Biology.
21. Spaulding, B., & Hauser, M. D. (2005). What experience is required for acquiring tool competence? Experiments with two callitrichids. Animal Behaviour, 70, 517-526.
22. Tebbich. S., & Bshary, R. (2004). Cognitive abilities related to tool use in the woodpecker finch (Cactospiza pallida). Animal Behaviour, 67, 689-697.
23. Tebbich, S., Seed, A. M., Emery, N. J., & Clayton, N. S. (in press). Non-tool-using rooks (Corvus frugilegus) solve the trap-tube task. Animal Cognition.
24. Visalberghi, E., & Limongelli. L. (1994). Lack of comprehension of cause effect relations in tool-using capuchin monkeys (Cebus apelld). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 108, 15-22.
25. Willatts, P. (1984). The Stage-IV infant's solution of problems requiring the use of supports. Infant Behavior and Development, 7, 125-134.