Animal Cognition

, Volume 17, Issue 2, pp 207–220 | Cite as

“Insight” in pigeons: absence of means–end processing in displacement tests

  • Robert G. CookEmail author
  • Catherine Fowler
Original Paper


The understanding of functional relations between action and consequence is a critical component of intelligence. To examine this linkage in pigeons, we investigated their understanding of the relations of the elements tested in an extension of Köhler’s box stacking task to this species. In the experiments, the pigeons had to move a spatially displaced box under an out-of-reach target. Experiment 1 successfully replicated and extended the previous finding showing that when separately trained to move a box and stand on it to peck the target, pigeons can synthesize these behaviors to solve the single-box displacement problem quickly on their first attempt. Experiment 2 tested whether pigeons, when given a simultaneous choice between two boxes with identical reinforcement histories, would selectively choose the box with the correct functional affordance (i.e., permitting standing) to solve the problem rather than a non-functional one. Their extensive, equivalent, and undirected behavior in moving both boxes during these tests suggests the pigeons did not possess a means–end understanding of the functional properties of the boxes. Instead, their results were consistent with an analysis of their earlier synthetic behavior as being due to the temporal and spatial relations of the physical elements in the task and their prior learned behaviors.


Insight Means–end Pigeons Learning Physical cognition Experience 



The authors wish to thank Evan McLean for his assistance in conducting these experiments, Ali Qadri, Justin Sayde, and Carl Hagmann for their comments on earlier drafts and Melissa Langer, Emily McDowell, Lilly Wong, and Jessica Levine for their assistance in scoring behaviors. This research was supported by a grant from the National Science Foundation.


  1. Auersperg AMI, Gajdon GK, Huber L (2009) Kea (Nestor notabilis) consider spatial relationships between objects in the support problem. Biol Lett 5:455–458PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Birch HG (1945) The relation of previous experience to insightful problem-solving. J Comp Psychol 38:367–383PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bird CD, Emery NJ (2009) Insightful problem solving and creative tool modification by captive nontool-using rooks. Proc Natl Acad Sci 106:10370–10375PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bluff LA, Weir AAS, Rutz C, Wimpenny JH, Kacelnik A (2007) Tool-related cognition in new Caledonian crows. Comp Cogn Behav Rev 2:1–25Google Scholar
  5. Boysen ST, Berntson GG, Hannan MB, Cacioppo JT (1996) Quantity-based interference and symbolic representations in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process 22:76–86PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Call J (2006) Descartes’ two errors: reason and reflection in the great apes. In: Hurley S, Nudds M (eds) Rational animals?. Oxford, Oxford, pp 219–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chappell J, Kacelnik A (2002) Tool selectivity in a non-primate, the New Caledonian crow (Corvus moneduloides). Anim Cogn 5:71–78PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chappell J, Kacelnik A (2004) Selection of tool diameter by New Caledonian crows (Corvus moneduloides). Anim Cogn 7:121–127PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cook RG (2002) Same-different concept formation in pigeons. In: Bekoff M, Allen C, Burghardt G (eds) The cognitive animal: empirical and theoretical perspectives on animal cognition. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 229–237Google Scholar
  10. Cook RG, Brooks DI (2009) Generalized auditory same-different discrimination by pigeons. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process 35:108–115PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cook RG, Wasserman EA (2006) Relational learning in pigeons. In: Wasserman EA, Zentall T (eds) Comparative cognition: experimental explorations of animal intelligence. Oxford University Press, London, pp 307–324Google Scholar
  12. Cook RG, Wasserman EA (2007) Learning and transfer of relational matching-to-sample by pigeons. Psychon Bull Rev 14:1107–1114PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dücker G, Rensch B (1977) The solution of patterned string problems by birds. Behaviour 62:164–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Emery NJ (2006) Cognitive ornithology: the evolution of avian intelligence. Philos Trans R Soc Lond 361:23–43. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2005.1736 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Epstein R (1987) The spontaneous interconnection of four repertoires of behavior in a pigeon (Columba livia). J Comp Psychol 101:197–201PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Epstein R (1991) Skinner, creativity, and the problem of spontaneous behavior. Psychol Sci 2:362–370CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Epstein R, Kirshnit CE, Lanza RP, Rubin LC (1984) ‘Insight’ in the pigeon: antecedents and determinants of an intelligent performance. Nature 308:61–62PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Foerder P, Galloway M, Barthel T, Moore DE, Reiss D (2011) Insightful problem solving in an Asian Elephant. PLoS ONE 6:e23251PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Funk M (2002) Problem solving skills in young yellow-crowned parakeets (Cyanoramphus auriceps). Anim Cogn 5:167–176PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hearst E, Jenkins HM (1974) Sign-tracking: the stimulus-reinforcer relation and directed action. Psychonomic Society, AustinGoogle Scholar
  21. Heinrich B (1995) An experimental investigation of insight in common ravens (Corvus corax). Auk 112:994–1003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Heinrich B, Bugnyar T (2005) Testing problem solving in ravens: string pulling to reach food. Ethology 111:962–976CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kirsch JA, Güntürkün O, Rose J (2008) Insight without cortex: lessons from the avian brain. Conscious Cogn 17:475–483PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Köhler W (1925) The mentality of apes. Routlege and Kegan Paul, LondonGoogle Scholar
  25. Lea SEG, Goto K, Osthaus B, Ryan CME (2006) The logic of the stimulus. Anim Cogn 9:247–256PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Liedtke J, Werdenich D, Gajdon GK, Huber L, Wanker R (2011) Big brains are not enough: performance of three parrot species in the trap-tube paradigm. Anim Cogn 14:143–149PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lind J, Ghirlanda S, Enquist M (2009) Insight learning or shaping? Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 106:E76PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Luciano MC (1991) Problem solving behavior: an experimental example. Psicothema 3:297–317Google Scholar
  29. Mendes N, Hanus D, Call J (2007) Raising the level: orangutans use water as a tool. Biol Lett 3:453–455PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Pepperberg IM (2004) “Insightful” string-pulling in Grey parrots (Psittacus erithacus) is affected by vocal competence. Anim Cogn 7:263–266PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Schiller PH (1952) Innate constituents of complex responses in primates. Psychol Rev 59:177–191PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Schmidt GF, Cook RG (2006) Mind the gap: means–end discrimination by pigeons. Anim Behav 71:599–608. doi: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2005.06.010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Seed AM, Tebbich S, Emery NJ, Clayton NS (2006) Investigating physical cognition in rooks, Corvus frugilegus. Curr Biol 16:697–701PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Shettleworth SJ (2010) Clever animals and killjoy explanations in comparative psychology. Trends Cogn Sci 14:477–481PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sternberg RJ, Davidson JE (1995) The nature of insight. The MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  36. Thorpe WH (1956) Learning and instinct in animals. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  37. Visalberghi E, Addessi E, Truppa V, Spagnoletti N, Ottoni E, Izar P, Fragaszy D (2009) Selection of effective stone tools by wild bearded capuchin monkeys. Curr Biol 19:213–217PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. von Bayern AM, Heathcote RJ, Rutz C, Kacelnik A (2009) The role of experience in problem solving and innovative tool use in crows. Curr Biol 19:1965–1968CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Weir A, Chappell J, Kacelnik A (2002) Shaping of hooks in New Caledonian crows. Science 297:981PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Werdenich D, Huber L (2006) A case of quick problem solving in birds: string pulling in keas, Nestor notabilis. Anim Behav 71:855–863CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Wilson M (2002) Six views of embodied cognition. Psychon Bull Rev 9:625–636PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyTufts UniversityMedfordUSA

Personalised recommendations