Cited by 227Memory Processes and InfluencesPrimate Behavior and EcologyChild and Animal Learning Development

Scrub jays (Aphelocoma coerulescens) remember the relative time of caching as well as the location and content of their caches.

Clayton, Nicola S., Dickinson, Anthony·1999·Journal of Comparative Psychology

Abstract

Two experiments examined whether food-storing scrub jays (Aphelocoma coerulescens) could remember when they cached particular food items as well as what they cached and where. In Experiment 1, scrub jays cached and recovered perishable "wax worms" (wax moth larvae) and nonperishable peanuts in 2 visuospatially distinct and trial-unique trays. The birds searched preferentially for fresh wax worms if they had cached them 4 hr earlier but rapidly learned to search for peanuts and avoid decayed wax worms that had been cached 124 hr previously. This pattern also was observed when the food items were removed before recovery on test trials. These results were replicated in Experiment 2 using a procedure in which both types of food were cached in different sides of the same caching tray: On the basis of a single, trial-unique experience, scrub jays could remember the relative time of caching as well as what type of food was cached in each cache site.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0735-7036.113.4.403

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Experiment 1 established that apes can remember the what, where and when of an event.

    “Experiment 1 established that apes can remember the what, where and when of an event, although this does not indicate the structure of the memories that support subjects’ choices (Clayton and Dickinson 1999; Clayton et al. 2001, 2003a).”

    From Keeping track of time: evidence for episodic-like memory in great apes (2010) · cites this paper as Clayton and Dickinson 1999

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Clayton, N. S., & Dickinson, A.
Affiliations
University of California, Davis (US)
Venue
Journal of Comparative Psychology
Published
1999
Volume
113
Issue
4
Pages
403-416
ISSN
  • 0093-4127 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-2087
  • 0735-7036
OpenAlex
W1971678556
Cited by
227
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 8
FWCI
3.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of comparative psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5r29ns035465-05)
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NS35465-03)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Primate Behavior and Ecology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Child and Animal Learning Development
Keywords
scrub jay, Aphelocoma coerulescens, food caching, temporal memory, spatial memory, perishable food, memory for time, animal cognition
MeSH terms
Animals, Appetitive Behavior, Birds, Food, Memory, Mental Processes

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