Dataset Information

Captive jays exhibit reduced problem-solving performance compared to wild conspecifics.

ABSTRACT: Animal cognitive abilities are frequently quantified in strictly controlled settings, with laboratory-reared subjects. Results from these studies have merit for clarifying proximate mechanisms of performance and the potential upper limits of certain cognitive abilities. Researchers often assume that performance on laboratory-based assessments accurately represents the abilities of wild conspecifics, but this is infrequently tested. In this experiment, we quantified the performance of wild and captive corvid subjects on an extractive foraging task. We found that performance was not equivalent, and wild subjects were faster at problem-solving to extract the food reward. By contrast, there was no difference in the time it took for captive and wild solvers to repeat the behaviour to get additional food rewards (learning speed). Our findings differ from the few other studies that have statistically compared wild and captive performance on assessments of problem-solving and learning. This indicates that without explicitly testing it, we cannot assume that captive animal performance on experimental tasks can be generalized to the species as a whole. To better understand the causes and consequences of a variety of animal cognitive abilities, we should measure performance in the social and physical environment in which the ability in question evolved.

SUBMITTER: McCune KB

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6366215 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Captive jays exhibit reduced problem-solving performance compared to wild conspecifics.

McCune Kelsey B KB Jablonski Piotr P Lee Sang-Im SI Ha Renee R RR

Royal Society open science 20190116 1

Animal cognitive abilities are frequently quantified in strictly controlled settings, with laboratory-reared subjects. Results from these studies have merit for clarifying proximate mechanisms of performance and the potential upper limits of certain cognitive abilities. Researchers often assume that performance on laboratory-based assessments accurately represents the abilities of wild conspecifics, but this is infrequently tested. In this experiment, we quantified the performance of wild and ca ...[more]

PMID: 30800378

Similar Datasets

Project description:This study is based on one collaborative problem solving task from an international assessment: the Xandar task. It was developed and delivered by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development Program for International Student Assessment (OECD PISA) 2015. We have investigated the relationship of problem solving performance with invested time and number of actions in collaborative episodes for the four parts of the Xandar task. The parts require the respondent to collaboratively plan a process for problem solving, implement the process, reach a solution, and evaluate the solution (For a full description, see the Materials and Methods section, "Parts of the Xandar Task.") Examples of an action include posting to a chat log, accessing a shared resource, or conducting a search on a map tool. Actions taken in each part of the task were identified by PISA and recorded in the data set numerically. A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) model looks at two types of relationship: at the level of latent variables (the factors) and at extra dependencies, which here are direct effects and correlated residuals (independent of the factors). The model, which is well-fitting, has three latent variables: actions (A), times (T), and level of performance (P). Evidence for the uni-dimensionality of performance level is also found in a separate analysis of the binary items. On the whole for the entire task, participants with more activities are less successful and faster, based on the United States data set employed in the analysis. By contrast, successful participants take more time. By task part, the model also investigates relationships between activities, time, and performance level within the parts. This was done because one can expect dependencies within parts of such a complex task. Results indicate some general and some specific relationships within the parts, see the full manuscript for more detail. We conclude with a discussion of what the investigated relationships may reveal. We also describe why such investigations may be important to consider when preparing students for improved skills in collaborative problem solving, considered a key aspect of successful 21st century skills in the workplace and in everyday life in many countries.

Project description:In the wild, primates are selective over the routes that they take when foraging and seek out preferred or ephemeral food. Given this, we tested how a group of captive chimpanzees weighed the relative benefits and costs of foraging for food in their environment when a less-preferred food could be obtained with less effort than a more-preferred food. In this study, a social group of six zoo-housed chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) could collect PVC tokens and exchange them with researchers for food rewards at one of two locations. Food preference tests had revealed that, for these chimpanzees, grapes were a highly-preferred food while carrot pieces were a less-preferred food. The chimpanzees were tested in three phases, each comprised of 30 thirty-minute sessions. In phases 1 and 3, if the chimpanzees exchanged a token at the location they collected them they received a carrot piece (no travel) or they could travel ?10 m to exchange tokens for grapes at a second location. In phase 2, the chimpanzees had to travel for both rewards (?10 m for carrot pieces, ?15 m for grapes). The chimpanzees learned how to exchange tokens for food rewards, but there was individual variation in the time it took for them to make their first exchange and to discover the different exchange locations. Once all the chimpanzees were proficient at exchanging tokens, they exchanged more tokens for grapes (phase 3). However, when travel was required for both rewards (phase 2), the chimpanzees were less likely to work for either reward. Aside from the alpha male, all chimpanzees exchanged tokens for both reward types, demonstrating their ability to explore the available options. Contrary to our predictions, low-ranked individuals made more exchanges than high-ranked individuals, most likely because, in this protocol, chimpanzees could not monopolize the tokens or access to exchange locations. Although the chimpanzees showed a preference for exchanging tokens for their more-preferred food, they appeared to develop strategies to reduce the cost associated with obtaining the grapes, including scrounging rewards and tokens from group mates and carrying more than one token when travelling to the farther exchange location. By testing the chimpanzees in their social group we were able to tease apart the social and individual influences on their decision making and the interplay with the physical demands of the task, which revealed that the chimpanzees were willing to travel farther for better.

Dataset Information

Captive jays exhibit reduced problem-solving performance compared to wild conspecifics.

Publications

Captive jays exhibit reduced problem-solving performance compared to wild conspecifics.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets