2023
DOI: 10.1007/s00265-023-03326-6
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Wild Australian magpies learn to pull intact, not broken, strings to obtain food

Abstract: The string-pulling paradigm is an approach commonly used in the study of animal cognition to investigate problem-solving abilities. This test involves an out-of-reach reward that can only be acquired through pulling a string. Australian magpies (Gymnorhina tibicen tyrannica) can solve cognitive tasks requiring associative and reversal learning, spatial memory, and inhibitory control. Nonetheless, whether magpies can pass a test of means-end understanding—the string-pull test—is unclear. We tested wild magpies … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
0
0

Year Published

2024
2024
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
2

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 54 publications
0
0
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For example, New Caledonian crows use perceptual feedback strategies to solve the broken string-pulling task, and no individual showed a significant preference for the connected string when perceptual feedback was restricted (Taylor et al, 2012). Some Australian magpies and African grey parrots can solve the broken string task, but they require a high number of trials, indicating that learning plays a crucial role in solving this task (Molina et al, 2019;Johnsson et al, 2023).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, New Caledonian crows use perceptual feedback strategies to solve the broken string-pulling task, and no individual showed a significant preference for the connected string when perceptual feedback was restricted (Taylor et al, 2012). Some Australian magpies and African grey parrots can solve the broken string task, but they require a high number of trials, indicating that learning plays a crucial role in solving this task (Molina et al, 2019;Johnsson et al, 2023).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%