↓ Skip to main content

A New Caledonian crow (Corvus moneduloides) creatively re-designs tools by bending or unbending aluminium strips

Overview of attention for article published in Animal Cognition, September 2006
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
95 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
187 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
A New Caledonian crow (Corvus moneduloides) creatively re-designs tools by bending or unbending aluminium strips
Published in
Animal Cognition, September 2006
DOI 10.1007/s10071-006-0052-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alex A. S. Weir, Alex Kacelnik

Abstract

Previous observations of a New Caledonian crow (Corvus moneduloides) spontaneously bending wire and using it as a hook [Weir et al. (2002) Science 297:981] have prompted questions about the extent to which these animals 'understand' the physical causality involved in how hooks work and how to make them. To approach this issue we examine how the same subject ("Betty") performed in three experiments with novel material, which needed to be either bent or unbent in order to function to retrieve food. These tasks exclude the possibility of success by repetition of patterns of movement similar to those employed before. Betty quickly developed novel techniques to bend the material, and appropriately modified it on four of five trials when unbending was required. She did not mechanically apply a previously learned set of movements to the new situations, and instead sought new solutions to each problem. However, the details of her behaviour preclude concluding definitely that she understood and planned her actions: in some cases she probed with the unmodified tools before modifying them, or attempted to use the unmodified (unsuitable) end of the tool after modification. Gauging New Caledonian crows' level of understanding is not yet possible, but the observed behaviour is consistent with a partial understanding of physical tasks at a level that exceeds that previously attained by any other non-human subject, including apes.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 187 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 8 4%
United Kingdom 3 2%
Germany 1 <1%
Czechia 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Unknown 171 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 34 18%
Researcher 32 17%
Student > Bachelor 30 16%
Student > Master 24 13%
Professor > Associate Professor 12 6%
Other 32 17%
Unknown 23 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 79 42%
Psychology 36 19%
Environmental Science 12 6%
Philosophy 8 4%
Neuroscience 8 4%
Other 15 8%
Unknown 29 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 December 2010.
All research outputs
#20,187,333
of 22,703,044 outputs
Outputs from Animal Cognition
#1,382
of 1,443 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#65,291
of 67,393 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Animal Cognition
#15
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,703,044 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,443 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 67,393 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.