CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 65Primate Behavior and EcologyAnimal Behavior and ReproductionAnimal Behavior and Welfare Studies

Recipients Affect Prosocial and Altruistic Choices in Jackdaws, Corvus monedula

Open access
Schwab, Christine, Swoboda, Ruth, Kotrschal, Kurt, Bugnyar, Thomas·2012·PLoS ONE
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0034922PMC PMC3325283
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Other-regarding preferences are a critical feature of human cooperation but to what extent non-human animals exhibit these preferences is a matter of intense discussion. We tested whether jackdaws show prosocial behaviour (providing benefits to others at no cost to themselves) and altruism (providing benefits to others while incurring costs) with both sibling and non-sibling recipients. In the prosocial condition, a box was baited on both the actor's and the recipient's side (1/1 option), whereas another box provided food only for the actor (1/0 option). In the altruistic condition, the boxes contained food for either the actor (1/0 option) or the recipient (0/1 option). The proportion of selfish (1/0 option) and cooperative (1/1 and 0/1 option, respectively) actors' choices was significantly affected by the recipients' behaviour. If recipients approached the boxes first and positioned themselves next to the box baited on their side, trying to access the food reward (recipient-first trials), actors were significantly more cooperative than when the actors approached the boxes first and made their choice prior to the recipients' arrival (actor-first trials). Further, in recipient-first trials actors were more cooperative towards recipients of the opposite sex, an effect that was even more pronounced in the altruistic condition. Hence, at no cost to the actors, all recipients could significantly influence the actors' behaviour, whereas at high costs this could be achieved even more so by recipients of different sex. Local/stimulus enhancement is discussed as the most likely cognitive mechanism to account for these effects.

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 · 10.1371/journal.pone.0034922

Cites

59 of 59 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?

  • Prosocial behaviors such as other-regarding preferences and reciprocity are thought to be more common in mammals compared to other vertebrates.

    “However, prosocial behaviors such as other-regarding preferences and reciprocity are thought to be more common in mammals compared to other vertebrates11, 12.”

    From Distinct selective forces and Neanderthal introgression shaped genetic diversity at genes involved in neurodevelopmental disorders (2017) · cites this paper as [12]

    The Introduction (page unavailable) describes a hypothesis that prosocial and altruistic behavior originated in the primate lineage, which supports the claim's general emphasis on mammals. But it does not say these behaviors are more common in mammals than in other vertebrates, or make that comparison for reciprocity; the Discussion says the study controlled for reciprocity rather than testing it. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Experiments in crows failed to reveal other-regarding preferences and reciprocity.

    “Conversely, experiments in crows, birds that display high cognitive abilities10, failed to reveal other-regarding preferences and reciprocity11, 12.”

    From Distinct selective forces and Neanderthal introgression shaped genetic diversity at genes involved in neurodevelopmental disorders (2017) · cites this paper as [12]

    The Discussion reports that jackdaws did not show other-regarding preferences per se, supporting that part of the claim. But the Introduction and Methods say the birds’ roles were not reversed to exclude short-term reciprocity; the experiment did not test and fail to find reciprocity. The paper also reports that recipients’ behaviour increased cooperative choices. (LLM, conf=0.90)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

1 of the 60 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [15]Boesch C Boesch-Achermann H 2000 The chimpanzees of the Taï forest Oxford Oxford University Press
  2. [30]Emery NJ 2004 Are corvids ‘feathered apes’? Cognitive evolution in crows, jays, rooks and jackdaws. Watanabe S Comparative analysis of minds Tokyo Keio University Press 181 213

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Schwab, C., Swoboda, R., Kotrschal, K., & Bugnyar, T.
Affiliations
University of Vienna (AT)
ORCID
Venue
PLoS ONE
Publisher
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Published
2012-04-12
Volume
7
Issue
4
Pages
e34922
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1371/journal.pone.0034922
PMC
PMC3325283
OpenAlex
W2019569543
Cited by
65
References
60
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 3
FWCI
6.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Phaidra (Universität Wien) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Austrian Science Fund (Y 366)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Primate Behavior and Ecology
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Animal Behavior and Reproduction
  • Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal Behavior and Welfare Studies
Keywords
prosocial behavior, altruism, jackdaw, Corvus monedula, social preferences, cooperation, sex differences, local enhancement, stimulus enhancement, animal cognition
MeSH terms
Altruism, Animals, Choice Behavior, Social Behavior, Crows

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