↓ Skip to main content

PLOS

Cognitive Processes Associated with Sequential Tool Use in New Caledonian Crows

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, August 2009
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
4 blogs
facebook
14 Facebook pages
wikipedia
6 Wikipedia pages
googleplus
8 Google+ users
video
3 YouTube creators

Readers on

mendeley
231 Mendeley
citeulike
4 CiteULike
Title
Cognitive Processes Associated with Sequential Tool Use in New Caledonian Crows
Published in
PLOS ONE, August 2009
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0006471
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joanna H. Wimpenny, Alex A. S. Weir, Lisa Clayton, Christian Rutz, Alex Kacelnik

Abstract

Using tools to act on non-food objects--for example, to make other tools--is considered to be a hallmark of human intelligence, and may have been a crucial step in our evolution. One form of this behaviour, 'sequential tool use', has been observed in a number of non-human primates and even in one bird, the New Caledonian crow (Corvus moneduloides). While sequential tool use has often been interpreted as evidence for advanced cognitive abilities, such as planning and analogical reasoning, the behaviour itself can be underpinned by a range of different cognitive mechanisms, which have never been explicitly examined. Here, we present experiments that not only demonstrate new tool-using capabilities in New Caledonian crows, but allow examination of the extent to which crows understand the physical interactions involved.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 231 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 6 3%
United Kingdom 6 3%
Germany 3 1%
Canada 3 1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Argentina 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Russia 1 <1%
Romania 1 <1%
Other 2 <1%
Unknown 206 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 40 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 37 16%
Student > Master 35 15%
Researcher 33 14%
Professor > Associate Professor 12 5%
Other 40 17%
Unknown 34 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 100 43%
Psychology 40 17%
Neuroscience 9 4%
Social Sciences 7 3%
Environmental Science 7 3%
Other 28 12%
Unknown 40 17%