Display options
Cite
Garland A, Low J. Reasoning about "Capability": Wild Robins Respond to Limb Visibility in Humans. Behav Sci (Basel). 2016;6(3)doi: 10.3390/bs6030015.
Garland, A., & Low, J. (2016). Reasoning about "Capability": Wild Robins Respond to Limb Visibility in Humans. Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 6(3), . https://doi.org/10.3390/bs6030015
Garland, Alexis, and Low, Jason. "Reasoning about "Capability": Wild Robins Respond to Limb Visibility in Humans." Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) vol. 6,3 (2016). doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/bs6030015
Garland A, Low J. Reasoning about "Capability": Wild Robins Respond to Limb Visibility in Humans. Behav Sci (Basel). 2016 Jul 21;6(3). doi: 10.3390/bs6030015. PMID: 27455334; PMCID: PMC5039515.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Behav Sci (Basel). 2016 Jul 21;6(3). doi: 10.3390/bs6030015.

Reasoning about "Capability": Wild Robins Respond to Limb Visibility in Humans.

Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland)

Alexis Garland, Jason Low

Affiliations

  1. Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience, Department of Biopsychology, Ruhr University Bochum, Bochum 44801, Germany. [email protected].
  2. School of Psychology, Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington 6140, New Zealand. [email protected].

PMID: 27455334 PMCID: PMC5039515 DOI: 10.3390/bs6030015

Abstract

Little comparative work has focused on what nonhumans understand about what physical acts others are capable of performing, and none has yet done so in the wild, or within a competitive framework. This study shows that North Island robins visually attend to human limbs in the context of determining who to steal food from. We presented 24 wild North Island Robins (Petroica longipes) with two experimenters. Robins could choose to steal a mealworm from one of two experimenters: one whose limbs were exposed and one who underwent a range of visual obstructions in two experiments. In most conditions, robins preferred to steal food located near the experimenter whose limbs were obscured by a cloth or board rather than food located near the experimenter whose limbs were not obscured. The robins' responses indicate that human limb visibility is associated with reduced access to food. Current findings lay the groundwork for a closer look at the potential general use of causal reasoning in an inter-specific context of using limbs to perform physical acts, specifically within the context of pilfering. This study presents one of the first tests of the role of visual attendance of potential limb availability in a competitive context, and could provide an alternative hypothesis for how other species have passed tests designed to examine what individuals understand about the physical acts others are capable of performing.

Keywords: New Zealand robin; capability; intentional actions; physical causality; pilfering

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Behav Processes. 1998 Feb;42(2-3):205-18 - PubMed
  2. Nat Commun. 2011 Nov 29;2:560 - PubMed
  3. Proc Biol Sci. 2011 Dec 22;278(1725):3694-702 - PubMed
  4. Anim Behav. 2001 Jan;61(1):139-151 - PubMed
  5. Behav Processes. 2011 Jun;87(2):237-40 - PubMed
  6. Anim Cogn. 2007 Apr;10(2):243-58 - PubMed
  7. Anim Cogn. 2005 Jul;8(3):164-81 - PubMed
  8. Anim Cogn. 2010 May;13(3):497-505 - PubMed
  9. Anim Cogn. 2014 Sep;17(5):1149-56 - PubMed
  10. Proc Biol Sci. 2008 Aug 7;275(1644):1709-15 - PubMed
  11. Nat Commun. 2012 Feb 21;3:693 - PubMed
  12. Curr Biol. 2005 Mar 8;15(5):447-52 - PubMed
  13. Anim Cogn. 2009 Jul;12(4):559-65 - PubMed
  14. Proc Biol Sci. 2009 Jan 22;276(1655):247-54 - PubMed
  15. Cognition. 2002 Apr;83(3):241-64 - PubMed
  16. Proc Biol Sci. 2011 Sep 7;278(1718):2621-7 - PubMed
  17. Curr Biol. 2009 Apr 14;19(7):602-6 - PubMed
  18. Cognition. 2007 Oct;105(1):1-25 - PubMed
  19. J Comp Psychol. 2000 Jun;114(2):148-57 - PubMed
  20. Anim Cogn. 2010 Mar;13(2):367-76 - PubMed
  21. Dev Psychol. 2005 Mar;41(2):328-37 - PubMed
  22. Anim Cogn. 2009 Jan;12(1):1-10 - PubMed
  23. Curr Biol. 2003 Apr 29;13(9):763-6 - PubMed
  24. Dev Sci. 2004 Sep;7(4):488-98 - PubMed
  25. PLoS One. 2011;6(12):e26887 - PubMed
  26. Anim Cogn. 1998 Oct;1(2):113-21 - PubMed
  27. Dev Sci. 2007 Jan;10(1):89-96 - PubMed
  28. Behav Processes. 2010 Oct;85(3):278-82 - PubMed
  29. Anim Cogn. 2008 Jul;11(3):457-66 - PubMed
  30. J Comp Psychol. 2005 May;119(2):145-54 - PubMed
  31. Mol Ecol. 2008 Jan;17(1):72-83 - PubMed
  32. Proc Biol Sci. 2010 Jan 7;277(1678):147-51 - PubMed
  33. J Comp Psychol. 2004 Jun;118(2):160-71 - PubMed
  34. Anim Cogn. 2006 Oct;9(4):307-16 - PubMed
  35. J Comp Psychol. 2006 Aug;120(3):294-302 - PubMed
  36. Proc Biol Sci. 2004 Jul 7;271(1546):1331-6 - PubMed
  37. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012 Oct 2;109(40):16389-91 - PubMed
  38. Science. 2002 Nov 22;298(5598):1634-6 - PubMed
  39. Anim Cogn. 2009 Mar;12(2):267-86 - PubMed
  40. Dev Sci. 2009 Nov;12(6):938-45 - PubMed
  41. Proc Biol Sci. 2010 Sep 7;277(1694):2637-43 - PubMed

Publication Types