Relative quantity judgment by Asian elephants (Elephas maximus)
Abstract
This study investigated whether Asian elephants can make relative quantity judgment (RQJ), a dichotomous judgment of unequal quantities ordered in magnitude. In Experiment 1, elephants were simultaneously shown two baskets with differing quantities of bait (up to 6 items). In Experiment 2, elephants were sequentially presented with baits, which could not be seen by elephants in their total quantities. The task of elephants was to choose the larger quantity in both experiments. Results showed that the elephants chose the larger quantity with significantly greater frequency. Interestingly, the elephants did not exhibit disparity or magnitude effects, in which performance declines with a smaller difference between quantities in a two-choice task, or the total quantity increases, respectively. These findings appear to be inconsistent with the previous reports of RQJ in other animals, suggesting that elephants may be using a different mechanism to compare and represent quantities than previously suggested for other species.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Irie-Sugimoto et al. (2009) and Irie and Hasegawa (2012) found that the performance of Asian elephants when discriminating between quantities of food remained consistent even when differences between the two quantities were small and when overall quantities were large.
“Irie-Sugimoto et al. (2009) and Irie and Hasegawa (2012) found that the performance of Asian elephants when discriminating between quantities of food remained consistent even when differences between the two quantities were small and when overall quantities were large.”
From Do elephants really never forget? What we know about elephant memory and a call for further investigation (2025) · cites this paper as Irie-Sugimoto et al., 2009
Both Asian and African savanna elephants can discriminate between different quantities of food using both or either visual and/or auditory cues.
“both Asian and African savanna elephants can discriminate between different quantities of food using both or either visual and/or auditory cues (when baits were dropped into a container; Irie-Sugimoto et al., 2009; Perdue et al., 2012; Snyder et al., 2021).”
From Do elephants really never forget? What we know about elephant memory and a call for further investigation (2025) · cites this paper as Irie-Sugimoto et al., 2009
The lack of disparity/distance or magnitude/size effects found by both Irie-Sugimoto et al. (2009) and Irie and Hasegawa (2012) led the authors to conclude that elephants may not represent numbers as approximations (i.e., accumulator model) but instead as separate memory files (i.e., object-file model).
“Thus, the lack of disparity/distance or magnitude/size effects found by both Irie-Sugimoto et al. (2009) and Irie and Hasegawa (2012) led the authors to conclude that elephants may not represent numbers as approximations (i.e., accumulator model) but instead as separate memory files (i.e., object-file model; Kahneman et al., 1992).”
From Do elephants really never forget? What we know about elephant memory and a call for further investigation (2025) · cites this paper as Irie-Sugimoto et al., 2009
Cites
Tomasello, M., & Call, J. (1997) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780195106237.001.0001 · Cited by 1,491 · see citing works
Rensch, B. (1957) · Scientific American · doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0257-44 · Cited by 70 · cited 4× · see citing works
“A seminal study to examine quantitative ability in elephants was carried by Rensch (1957).”
BackgroundInfluentialEvidence of means–end behavior in Asian elephants (Elephas maximus)
Irie-Sugimoto, N., Kobayashi, T., Sato, T., & Hasegawa, T. (2008) · Animal Cognition · doi:10.1007/s10071-007-0126-z · Cited by 48 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Perdue, B. M., Talbot, C. F., Stone, A. M., & Beran, M. J. (2012) · Animal Cognition · doi:10.1007/s10071-012-0521-y · Cited by 115 · see citing works
Insightful problem solving in an Asian elephant
Foerder, P., Galloway, M., Barthel, T., Moore, D. E., & Reiss, D. (2011) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0023251 · Cited by 107 · see citing works
Elephants have a nose for quantity
Plotnik, J. M., Brubaker, D. L., Dale, R., Tiller, L. N., Mumby, H. S., & Clayton, N. S. (2019) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1818284116 · Cited by 71 · see citing works
Plotnik, J. M., & Jacobson, S. L. (2022) · Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.cobeha.2022.101148 · Cited by 34 · see citing works
Unique numerical competence of Asian elephants on the relative numerosity judgment task
Irie, N., Hiraiwa-Hasegawa, M., & Kutsukake, N. (2019) · Journal of Ethology · doi:10.1007/s10164-018-0563-y · Cited by 32 · see citing works
Summation by Asian Elephants (Elephas maximus)
Irie, N., & Hasegawa, T. (2012) · Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.3390/bs2020050 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
Self-citationHighfill, L. E., Spencer, J. M., Fad, O., & Arnold, A. M. (2016) · International Journal of Comparative Psychology · doi:10.46867/ijcp.2016.29.00.12 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Snyder, R. J., Barrett, L. P., Emory, R. A., & Perdue, B. M. (2021) · Animal Cognition · doi:10.1007/s10071-021-01504-5 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Hope, S. F., Willgohs, K. R., Dittakul, S., & Plotnik, J. M. (2025) · Learning & Behavior · doi:10.3758/s13420-024-00655-y · Cited by 8 · see citing works
- Authors
- Irie-Sugimoto, N., Kobayashi, T., Sato, T., & Hasegawa, T.
- Affiliations
- NTT (Japan) (JP)
- The University of Tokyo (JP)
- ORCID
- Kobayashi, Tessei
- Venue
- Animal Cognition
- Published
- 2008-08-20
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 193-199
- ISSN
- 1435-9448 (ISSN-L)
- 1435-9456
- OpenAlex
- W1971687818
- Cited by
- 86
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 8
- FWCI
- 5.70
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Animal Cognition (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Association of Zoos and Aquariums
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Cognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skills
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Primate Behavior and Ecology
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Child and Animal Learning Development
- Keywords
- Asian elephant, numerical cognition, quantity comparison, magnitude effect, sequential presentation
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Choice Behavior, Concept Formation, Elephants, Female, Judgment, Male, Mathematics, Pattern Recognition, Visual, Problem Solving, Serial Learning, Mathematical Concepts
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
