CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 12Primate Behavior and EcologyAnimal Behavior and Welfare StudiesChild and Animal Learning Development

Performance on a means end task by Asian elephants (Elephas maximus) in a positive reinforcement-based protected contact setting

Open access
Highfill, Lauren E., Spencer, Jessica M., Fad, Otto, Arnold, Ann Marie·2016·International Journal of Comparative Psychology
DOI 10.46867/ijcp.2016.29.00.12
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The current study tested six Asian elephants (Elephas maximus) on a means-end behavioral task of pulling a support to retrieve a distant object; a systematic replication of the Irie-Sugimoto et al. (2008) study. The paradigm was somewhat modified from the original research to accommodate a protected contact setting, reduce the total number of trials, and one condition was excluded. Each elephant was tested on three conditions of increasing difficulty. Specifically, subjects were asked to select from a choice of two trays where one intact tray was baited with a highly-valued produce item and the other was A) empty; B) baited adjacent to the tray; and C) baited on the far side of a break in the tray. Results indicated that the elephants met or exceeded the criteria established for conditions A and B, but performed at chance levels on condition C. These data are contrasted with those of the original study where one elephant met criteria for all three conditions. We discuss potentially relevant variables affecting performance including differences in visual access to the trays, motivation levels, and training style.

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 · 10.46867/ijcp.2016.29.00.12

Cites

19 of 19 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?

  • Only in more recent years has greater focus been placed on more cognitive types of enrichment.

    “Only in more recent years has greater focus been placed on more cognitive types of enrichment, including time-delay puzzle feeders, high tech enrichment devices, and insightful problem solving tasks (Foerder et al., 2011;Highfill et al., 2016;Krebs & Watters, 2017;French, Mancini & Sharp, 2018;Barrett & Benson-Amran, 2020).”

    From Continuing challenges of elephant captivity: the captive environment, health issues, and welfare implications (2024) · cites this paper as Highfill et al., 2016

    The Conclusion (page unavailable) says that participation in cognitive research projects like this elephant means-end task could provide enrichment through mental stimulation. This supports the paper as an example of cognitive enrichment, but it does not establish that greater focus has been placed on such enrichment only in recent years. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    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

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Piaget, J. (1952). The origins of intelligence in children (M. Worden, Trans.). New York, NY: International Universities Press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Highfill, L. E., Spencer, J. M., Fad, O., & Arnold, A. M.
Affiliations
Eckerd College (US)
Corresponding author
Highfill, Lauren E.
Venue
International Journal of Comparative Psychology
Publisher
International Society of Comparative Psychology
Published
2016
Volume
29
ISSN
  • 0889-3667 (ISSN-L)
  • 2168-3344
DOI
10.46867/ijcp.2016.29.00.12
OpenAlex
W2559015493
Cited by
12
References
19
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2
FWCI
1.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • International Journal of Comparative Psychology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Primate Behavior and Ecology
  • Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal Behavior and Welfare Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Child and Animal Learning Development
Keywords
Asian elephant, positive reinforcement, animal cognition, object retrieval, visual access, motivation, training style

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