4.5 Article

Bears 'count' too: quantity estimation and comparison in black bears, Ursus americanus

期刊

ANIMAL BEHAVIOUR
卷 84, 期 1, 页码 231-238

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2012.05.001

关键词

area; bear; number; quantity estimation; ratio; Ursus americanus

资金

  1. Aubrey Keith Lucas Endowment for Faculty Excellence Award
  2. Ella Ginn Lucas Endowment for Faculty Excellence Award
  3. National Science Foundation [0924811]
  4. National Institutes of Health [060563]
  5. Division Of Behavioral and Cognitive Sci
  6. Direct For Social, Behav & Economic Scie [924811] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Studies of bear cognition are notably missing from the comparative record despite bears' large relative brain size and interesting status as generalist carnivores facing complex foraging challenges, but lacking complex social structures. We investigated the numerical abilities of three American black bears, Ursus Americanus, by presenting discrimination tasks on a touch-screen computer. One bear chose the larger of two arrays of dot stimuli, while two bears chose the smaller array of dots. On some trials, the relative number of dots was congruent with the relative total area of the two arrays. On other trials, number of dots was incongruent with area. All of the bears were above chance on trials of both types with static dots. Despite encountering greater difficulty with dots that moved within the arrays, one bear was able to discriminate numerically larger arrays of moving dots, and a subset of moving dots from within the larger array, even when area and number were incongruent. Thus, although the bears used area as a cue to guide their responses, they were also able to use number as a cue. The pattern of performance was similar to that found previously with monkeys, and suggests that bears may also show other forms of sophisticated quantitative abilities. The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据