Monday, June 2, 2025

Hunter, Holly, Grace Blackburn, Benjamin J. Ashton, and Amanda R. Ridley. "Group size affects spontaneous quantity discrimination performance in wild Western Australian magpies (Gymnorhina tibicen dorsalis)." Animal Cognition 28, no. 1 (2025):

What They Did

The researchers studied the ability of wild Western Australian magpies to distinguish quantities. The magpies live in groups of 3 to 15 in urban semi-natural areas and are accustomed to humans. Individual magpies were separated from their group, either by waiting for them to wander off naturally or by distracting the other group members. The bird under study was then presented with a randomized sequence of choices between two boards: one with two strips of cheese and the other with two, three, four, or five strips. Over the course of the experiment, 42 birds were tested, each being offered the four choices 15 times on separate days.

 The researchers found that the birds chose the larger amount of food more than half the time, with better performance correlated with greater differences between the amounts. They also found that birds that lived in smaller groups were more likely to choose five strips of cheese over two, but the group size had no effect for the other combinations. The correlation between “correct” choice likelihood and difference between the choices suggests that the birds decide based on ratio rather than absolute number, with the smallest ratio (i.e. 2:5) easiest to detect.

The researchers also propose two hypotheses for the effect of group size. Smaller groups may offer less protection in intergroup conflicts, making it important to compare the size of rival group. Smaller groups also have fewer individuals watching for predators, so it’s more important to maximize the benefit of limited foraging time.

 

Further Exploration

The researchers describe two cognitive systems animals use to process quantity information: the object-file system tracks each object and works for small numbers, while the approximate number system provides a general idea of which group is larger. This seems to be the case for humans too. Automatically knowing how many objects are in a group in called subitizing (see https://hechingerreport.org/proof-points-subitizing/). Perceptual subitizing means seeing the number of objects “all at once.” For humans, the maximum is typically 4 to 6 objects.

Larger numbers, however, can be subitized by mentally dividing the array into groups and subitizing the number in each group, such as seeing three groups of four and knowing there are 12 objects without thinking about counting or multiplication. This process is called conceptual subitizing. Subitizing sounds as if it might be analogous to the object-file system described in animal cognition, and of course humans also seem to have an approximate number system. We can tell which group of items contains more, and we’re better at it if there’s a greater difference between them.

Humans can also count one by one, as long as we have the patience for. A lot of animals deal with quantity in a lot of different ways (see https://www.quantamagazine.org/animals-can-count-and-use-zero-how-far-does-their-number-sense-go-20210809/), but I haven’t seen any evidence that they can count symbolically and indefinitely the way humans do. It would also be interesting to see how animals handle number when the objects are dissimilar or when distractor objects are included, but that’s a rabbit hole for another day!    

A Western Australian magpie on the ground facing away from the camera. The front is all black, whilte the back, wings, and tail have large areas of both black and white
Image credit: D. Gordon E. Robertson

No comments:

Post a Comment

Please be nice.

Harris Friedman and the Science of Transpersonal Psychology

I'm deep in my final paper for my independent study, so once again I'm posting part of a writeup for the research I've done alon...