scholarly journals Did tool-use evolve with enhanced physical cognitive abilities?

2013 ◽  
Vol 368 (1630) ◽  
pp. 20120418 ◽  
Author(s):  
I. Teschke ◽  
C. A. F. Wascher ◽  
M. F. Scriba ◽  
A. M. P. von Bayern ◽  
V. Huml ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Tool Use ◽  
Cognitive Abilities ◽  
Comparative Studies ◽  
Critical Evaluation ◽  
Physical Problem ◽  
Driving Factor ◽  
Small Tree ◽  
Learning Tasks ◽  
New Caledonian Crows ◽  
Methodological Problems

The use and manufacture of tools have been considered to be cognitively demanding and thus a possible driving factor in the evolution of intelligence. In this study, we tested the hypothesis that enhanced physical cognitive abilities evolved in conjunction with the use of tools, by comparing the performance of naturally tool-using and non-tool-using species in a suite of physical and general learning tasks. We predicted that the habitually tool-using species, New Caledonian crows and Galápagos woodpecker finches, should outperform their non-tool-using relatives, the small tree finches and the carrion crows in a physical problem but not in general learning tasks. We only found a divergence in the predicted direction for corvids. That only one of our comparisons supports the predictions under this hypothesis might be attributable to different complexities of tool-use in the two tool-using species. A critical evaluation is offered of the conceptual and methodological problems inherent in comparative studies on tool-related cognitive abilities.

Lateralized tool use in wild New Caledonian crows

2004 ◽  
Vol 67 (2) ◽  
pp. 327-332 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robb Rutledge ◽  
Gavin R Hunt
Keyword(s):  
Tool Use ◽  
New Caledonian Crows

scholarly journals Tool use by wild New Caledonian crows Corvus moneduloides at natural foraging sites

2010 ◽  
Vol 277 (1686) ◽  
pp. 1377-1385 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lucas A. Bluff ◽  
Jolyon Troscianko ◽  
Alex A. S. Weir ◽  
Alex Kacelnik ◽  
Christian Rutz
Keyword(s):  
Tool Use ◽  
New Caledonian Crows ◽  
Corvus Moneduloides

scholarly journals Functional mastery of percussive technology in nut-cracking and stone-flaking actions: experimental comparison and implications for the evolution of the human brain

2012 ◽  
Vol 367 (1585) ◽  
pp. 59-74 ◽  
Author(s):  
Blandine Bril ◽  
Jeroen Smaers ◽  
James Steele ◽  
Robert Rein ◽  
Tetsushi Nonaka ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Skill Acquisition ◽  
Tool Use ◽  
Cognitive Abilities ◽  
Brain Evolution ◽  
Experimental Comparison ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Research Areas ◽  
Nut Cracking ◽  
Percussive Technology ◽  
Recent Experimental Work

Various authors have suggested behavioural similarities between tool use in early hominins and chimpanzee nut cracking, where nut cracking might be interpreted as a precursor of more complex stone flaking. In this paper, we bring together and review two separate strands of research on chimpanzee and human tool use and cognitive abilities. Firstly, and in the greatest detail, we review our recent experimental work on behavioural organization and skill acquisition in nut-cracking and stone-knapping tasks, highlighting similarities and differences between the two tasks that may be informative for the interpretation of stone tools in the early archaeological record. Secondly, and more briefly, we outline a model of the comparative neuropsychology of primate tool use and discuss recent descriptive anatomical and statistical analyses of anthropoid primate brain evolution, focusing on cortico-cerebellar systems. By juxtaposing these two strands of research, we are able to identify unsolved problems that can usefully be addressed by future research in each of these two research areas.

scholarly journals New Caledonian crows plan for specific future tool use

2020 ◽  
Vol 287 (1938) ◽  
pp. 20201490
Author(s):  
M. Boeckle ◽  
M. Schiestl ◽  
A. Frohnwieser ◽  
R. Gruber ◽  
R. Miller ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Tool Use ◽  
Convergent Evolution ◽  
Food Item ◽  
Common Ancestor ◽  
Research Effort ◽  
Human Intelligence ◽  
Future Events ◽  
New Caledonian Crows ◽  
Future Task ◽  
The Right

The ability to plan for future events is one of the defining features of human intelligence. Whether non-human animals can plan for specific future situations remains contentious: despite a sustained research effort over the last two decades, there is still no consensus on this question. Here, we show that New Caledonian crows can use tools to plan for specific future events. Crows learned a temporal sequence where they were (a) shown a baited apparatus, (b) 5 min later given a choice of five objects and (c) 10 min later given access to the apparatus. At test, these crows were presented with one of two tool–apparatus combinations. For each combination, the crows chose the right tool for the right future task, while ignoring previously useful tools and a low-value food item. This study establishes that planning for specific future tool use can evolve via convergent evolution, given that corvids and humans shared a common ancestor over 300 million years ago, and offers a route to mapping the planning capacities of animals.

scholarly journals Decision-making flexibility in New Caledonian crows, young children and adult humans in a multi-dimensional tool-use task

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachael Miller ◽  
Romana Gruber ◽  
Anna Frohnwieser ◽  
Martina Schiestl ◽  
Sarah A. Jelbert ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Tool Use ◽  
Food Item ◽  
Work Effort ◽  
Pongo Abelii ◽  
Adult Humans ◽  
New Caledonian Crows ◽  
Multiple Variables ◽  
Corvus Moneduloides ◽  
Decision Making Tool

AbstractThe ability to make profitable decisions in natural foraging contexts may be influenced by an additional requirement of tool-use, due to increased levels of relational complexity and additional work-effort imposed by tool-use, compared with simply choosing between an immediate and delayed food item. We examined the flexibility for making the most profitable decisions in a multi-dimensional tool-use task, involving different apparatuses, tools and rewards of varying quality, in 3-5-year-old children, adult humans and tool-making New Caledonian crows (Corvus moneduloides). We also compared our results to previous studies on habitually tool-making orangutans (Pongo abelii) and non-tool-making Goffin’s cockatoos (Cacatua goffiniana). Adult humans, cockatoos and crows, though not children and orangutans, did not select a tool when it was not necessary, which was the more profitable choice in this situation. Adult humans, orangutans and cockatoos, though not crows and children, were able to refrain from selecting non-functional tools. By contrast, the birds, though not primates tested, struggled to attend to multiple variables - where two apparatuses, two tools and two reward qualities were presented simultaneously - without extended experience. These findings indicate: (1) in a similar manner to humans and orangutans, New Caledonian crows and Goffin’s cockatoos can flexibly make profitable decisions in some decision-making tool-use tasks, though the birds may struggle when tasks become more complex; (2) children and orangutans may have a bias to use tools in situations where adults and other tool-making species do not.

scholarly journals The Evolution of Grooming and Hand Use in Primates: An Interdisciplinary Perspective

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander Dunkel
Keyword(s):  
Tool Use ◽  
Cognitive Abilities ◽  
Primate Evolution ◽  
Object Manipulation ◽  
Body Parts ◽  
Bayesian Decision ◽  
Technical Intelligence ◽  
Potential Link ◽  
Machiavellian Intelligence ◽  
Common Misconceptions

The evolution of manual grooming and its implications have received little attention in the quest to understand the origins of simian primates and their social and technical intelligence. All simians groom manually, whereas prosimians groom orally despite comparable manual dexterity between some members of the two groups. Simians also exhibit a variable propensity for the manipulation of inanimate, non-food objects, which has culminated in tool making and tool use in some species. However, lemuriform primates also seem capable of tool use with training. Furthermore, lemuriforms appear to understand the concept of a tool and use their own body parts as “tools”, despite not using inanimate objects. This suggests that prosimian primates are pre-adapted for proprioceptive object manipulation and tool use, but do not express these cognitive abilities by default. This essay explores the paleontological, anatomical, cognitive, ethological, and neurological roots of these abilities and attempts to explain this behavioural divide between simians and prosimians. Common misconceptions about early primate evolution and captive behaviours are addressed, and chronological inconsistencies with Machiavellian Intelligence are examined. A “licking to picking” hypothesis is also proposed to explain a potential link between manual grooming and object manipulation, and to reconcile the inconsistencies of Machiavellian Intelligence. Bayesian decision theory, the evolution of the parietal cortex and enhanced proprioception, and analogies with behavioural changes resulting from artificial selection may help provide new insights into the minds of both our primate kin and ourselves.

scholarly journals Delayed gratification in New Caledonian crows and young children: influence of reward type and visibility

2019 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-85 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachael Miller ◽  
Anna Frohnwieser ◽  
Martina Schiestl ◽  
Dakota E. McCoy ◽  
Russell D. Gray ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Abilities ◽  
Delay Of Gratification ◽  
Comparative Investigation ◽  
Self Control ◽  
Primate Species ◽  
Delayed Gratification ◽  
New Caledonian Crows ◽  
Species Comparisons ◽  
The Subject

Abstract Self-control underlies cognitive abilities such as decision making and future planning. Delay of gratification is a measure of self-control and involves obtaining a more valuable outcome in the future by tolerating a delay or investing a greater effort in the present. Contextual issues, such as reward visibility and type, may influence delayed gratification performance, although there has been limited comparative investigation between humans and other animals, particularly non-primate species. Here, we adapted an automated ‘rotating tray’ paradigm used previously with capuchin monkeys to test for delay of gratification ability that requires little pre-test training, where the subject must forgo an immediate, less preferred reward for a delayed, more preferred one. We tested New Caledonian crows and 3–5-year-old human children. We manipulated reward types to differ in quality or quantity (Experiments 1 and 2) as well as visibility (Experiment 2). In Experiments 1 and 2, both species performed better when the rewards varied in quality as opposed to quantity, though performed above chance in both conditions. In Experiment 1, both crows and children were able to delay gratification when both rewards were visible. In Experiment 2, 5-year-old children outperformed 3- and 4-year olds, though overall children still performed well, while the crows struggled when reward visibility was manipulated, a result which may relate to difficulties in tracking the experimenters’ hands during baiting. We discuss these findings in relation to the role of contextual issues on self-control when making species comparisons and investigating the mechanisms of self-control.

Bonobos, chimpanzees and tools: Integrating species-specific psychological biases and socio-ecology

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Josep Call
Keyword(s):  
Tool Use ◽  
Cognitive Abilities ◽  
Ecological Factors ◽  
Striking Difference ◽  
Personality Profiles ◽  
Il Y A ◽  
In The Wild ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Species Specific

Over the years there has been some controversy regarding the comparison between chimpanzees and bonobos. Whereas some authors have stressed their differences, others have stressed their similarities. One striking difference between wild chimpanzees and bonobos is tool use, especially in foraging contexts. While several chimpanzee populations possess tool kits formed by multiple tools (and their associated techniques) to exploit embedded resources, bonobos display no such tool specialization. However, studies in the laboratory have shown that bonobos are perfectly capable of using tools. In fact, several studies devoted to investigate the cognitive abilities underlying tool use have failed to detect any substantial differences between the two species. This chapter explores three aspects that could explain the difference between chimpanzees and bonobos in their propensity to use tools in the wild: socio-ecological factors, social versus technical cognition, and personality profiles. Au cours du temps, il y a eu beaucoup de controverse en relation aux comparaisons entres les chimpanzés et les bonobos. Alors que certains auteurs ont stressé les différences entre eux, d’autres ont stressé les similarités. Une grande différence entre les chipmanzés et les bonobos sauvages est l’utilisation des outils, spécialement en butinage. Tandis que plusieurs populations de chimpanzés possèdent des boîtes à outils diverses (et leur techniques respectives) pour exploiter les ressources, les bonobos ne montrent pas une spécialisation pareille. Cependant, les études en laboratoir ont montré que les bonobos sont capables d’utiliser des outils. En faite, plusieurs études des facultés cognitives dans l’utilisation des outils n’ont pas pu détecter de différences substantielles entre les deux espèces. Je vais explorer trois aspects qui pourraient expliquer les différences entre les chimpanzés et les bonobos en ce qui concerne leur tendance naturelle à utiliser les outils: facteurs socio-écologiques, cognition social vs. technique, et profils de personnalité.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document