↓ Skip to main content

How New Caledonian crows solve novel foraging problems and what it means for cumulative culture

Overview of attention for article published in Learning & Behavior, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#10 of 904)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
6 news outlets
blogs
3 blogs
twitter
18 X users
googleplus
2 Google+ users
video
1 YouTube creator

Readers on

mendeley
113 Mendeley
Title
How New Caledonian crows solve novel foraging problems and what it means for cumulative culture
Published in
Learning & Behavior, August 2015
DOI 10.3758/s13420-015-0194-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Corina J. Logan, Alexis J. Breen, Alex H. Taylor, Russell D. Gray, William J. E. Hoppitt

Abstract

New Caledonian crows make and use tools, and tool types vary over geographic landscapes. Social learning may explain the variation in tool design, but it is unknown to what degree social learning accounts for the maintenance of these designs. Indeed, little is known about the mechanisms these crows use to obtain information from others, despite the question's importance in understanding whether tool behavior is transmitted via social, genetic, or environmental means. For social transmission to account for tool-type variation, copying must utilize a mechanism that is action specific (e.g., pushing left vs. right) as well as context specific (e.g., pushing a particular object vs. any object). To determine whether crows can copy a demonstrator's actions as well as the contexts in which they occur, we conducted a diffusion experiment using a novel foraging task. We used a nontool task to eliminate any confounds introduced by individual differences in their prior tool experience. Two groups had demonstrators (trained in isolation on different options of a four-option task, including a two-action option) and one group did not. We found that crows socially learn about context: After observers see a demonstrator interact with the task, they are more likely to interact with the same parts of the task. In contrast, observers did not copy the demonstrator's specific actions. Our results suggest it is unlikely that observing tool-making behavior transmits tool types. We suggest it is possible that tool types are transmitted when crows copy the physical form of the tools they encounter.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 18 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 113 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 112 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 20%
Student > Master 15 13%
Student > Bachelor 15 13%
Researcher 13 12%
Other 5 4%
Other 19 17%
Unknown 23 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 44 39%
Psychology 19 17%
Social Sciences 4 4%
Environmental Science 3 3%
Linguistics 2 2%
Other 11 10%
Unknown 30 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 74. 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 01 July 2018.
All research outputs
#579,377
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Learning & Behavior
#10
of 904 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,054
of 275,206 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Learning & Behavior
#1
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 904 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
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 275,206 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them