Cited by 5Primate Behavior and EcologyMemory Processes and InfluencesChild and Animal Learning Development

No evidence for future planning in Canada jays (Perisoreus canadensis)

Open access
Martin, R. Jeffrey, Martin, Glynis K., Roberts, William A., Sherry, David F.·2021·Biology Letters

Abstract

In the past 20 years, research in animal cognition has challenged the belief that complex cognitive processes are uniquely human. At the forefront of these challenges has been research on mental time travel and future planning in jays. We tested whether Canada jays (Perisoreus canadensis) demonstrated future planning, using a procedure that has produced evidence of future planning in California scrub-jays. Future planning in this procedure is caching in locations where the bird will predictably experience a lack of food in the future. Canada jays showed no evidence of future planning in this sense and instead cached in the location where food was usually available, opposite to the behaviour described for California scrub-jays. We provide potential explanations for these differing results adding to the recent debates about the role of complex cognition in corvid caching strategies.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1098/rsbl.2021.0504

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • In caching experiments, scrub-jays, but not Canada jays, preferentially cache in places where they have learned to expect not to receive food the following morning, indicating future planning.

    “In caching experiments, scrub-jays [158], but not Canada jays [159], have been shown to plan for the future by preferentially caching in places where they have learned to expect not to receive food the following morning.”

    From Is episodic-like memory <i>like</i> episodic memory? (2024) · cites this paper as [159]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Martin, R. J., Martin, G. K., Roberts, W. A., & Sherry, D. F.
Affiliations
Western University (CA)
Corresponding author
Martin, R. Jeffrey
Venue
Biology Letters
Published
2021-12
Volume
17
Issue
12
Pages
20210504-20210504
ISSN
  • 1744-9561 (ISSN-L)
  • 1744-957X
OpenAlex
W4200461461
Cited by
5
References
36
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1
FWCI
0.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Biology Letters (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DRYAD (public-domain)
Funders
Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (105542)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Primate Behavior and Ecology
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Child and Animal Learning Development
Keywords
Canada jay, Perisoreus canadensis, future planning, mental time travel, food caching, corvid cognition, animal cognition, caching strategies
MeSH terms
Animals, Canada, Feeding Behavior, Food, Humans, Songbirds, Passeriformes

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