5 ms·
I'm kind of used to New Scientist misreporting my own and others research. If someone has a link to the original study I'd be interested in taking a look. Over
by new299 9y ago
I'm kind of used to New Scientist misreporting my own and others research. If someone has a link to the original study I'd be interested in taking a look.
Overall, is it really useful to compare Ravens and human children for their long term planning ability? Human children are still under the care of their parents. There's no real pressure on them to store food tokens...
- grasshopperpurp 9y agoI believe this is the link you're looking for (haven't read it yet, but I did verify that the full text is available): A raven's memories are for the future http://science.sciencemag.org/content/357/6347/126 http://science.sciencemag.org/content/357/6347/126 When searching, I also found this, which I missed the first time around, and it might be interesting to some: Subadult ravens generally don't transfer valuable tokens to conspecifics when there is nothing to gain for themselves https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4484978/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4484978/
- new299 9y agoThanks for the links. If the first link is what they're referring too, then it's a pretty dumb headline. That article is a non-peer reviewed perspective on some recent research. To provide background they make a throw away comment about some work done in 2007 [1] and say it's kind of similar to what you see in 4 year old children (in another study). The original researchers don't seem to have made that statement, or attempted to support it. So... par for the course for New Scientist I guess... [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17314979?access_num=17314979&link_type=MED&dopt=Abstract https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17314979?access_num=1731...