Posted on 09/24/2006 6:20:37 AM PDT by grjr21
Alex is known for showing the world just how smart African Grey parrots are and hes known for breaking barrier after barrier in the world of animal intelligence. But now hes achieved a feat that no other animal has ever achieved, a feat that we believe will wow the worldand its a feat he accomplished all by himself! Dr. Pepperbergs newest paper, Ordinality and Inferential Abilities of a Grey Parrot (Psittacus erithacus), has just been published in this months Journal of Comparative Psychology. This paper outlines Alexs newest achievement in number comprehension. We think it will amaze you as much as it amazes us. Alex now knows that the number of objects on a tray, six sticks for example, can be represented by the vocal label six, and that the written numeral 6 represents those objects as well as the vocal label. This may not sound too astonishing, but what he does with this knowledge is quite amazing--as is the story of how he reached his current level of understanding. Its as easy as 1-2-3 For some time, Alex has been able to name the color of an item and hes been able to count the number of objects presented to him. Alexs math education also included being taught the vocal label of written number symbols, such as spoken label five for 5.
When learning these verbal labels for the written number symbols, Alex learned them differently than we humans do. Human children are generally taught to count in an order of numbers, such as 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and so on. Learning numbers in this manner automatically infers the order or numerical value of the numbers (their ordinality) by their placement. However, children may demonstrate that they can determine which number is bigger than the other simply by the numbers position in the order of the counting sequence, but they may not have a true understanding of the numbers value. Alex learned his written numerals in an out of order sequence, learning 3 and 4 first, then 2, 5, 6 and lastly, 1. Using refrigerator magnet numerals, Alex learned the names of number symbols using his knowledge of color. Dr. Pepperberg would ask (using the Model/Rival technique), What number green? when holding a green 4. Or she would ask, What color 5? when holding a red number 5. Prior to this, Alex had learned how to label the number of the objects in a set and even to perform this behavior for similar objects interspersed with different objects. For instance, when 4 red objects were placed among 6 blue objects, Alex was asked how many red? and he could correctly answer four. Consequently, Alex knew that the number of objects was represented by a vocal label that described that number. When Dr. Pepperberg combined all these skills into a number comprehension test for Alex, an amazing thing occurred. Which bigger? Out of Alexs sight, a tray was prepared with either two refrigerator magnet numbers of different colors or a set of objects combined with one refrigerator magnet number, with the set of objects being one color and the number symbol being another color. For example, Alex was presented with three red objects and the number symbol 5. Alex was then asked, What color number is bigger (or smaller)? And he answered correctly. This indicated that Alex understood that the single number symbol 5 represented a larger object set than the three objects sitting in front of him. This type of problem was alternated with other types of number comprehension tests. Also out of Alexs sight, another type of tray was prepared, one with two different number symbols, each with a different color. These were presented to Alex, and he was again asked, What color number is bigger (or smaller)? And he would again answer correctly. An Unbelievable Understanding The last type of number comprehension challenge was especially revealing. Once again, out of Alexs sight, a tray was prepared for his test. But this time, the two number symbols of different numerical value (and two different colors) had a different physical size. For instance, a larger 2 symbol would be placed next to a significantly smaller-sized number 5. Alex would be asked the same question, what color number is smaller (or bigger)? He answered correctly with respect to the value of the symbol, not its physical size.
Alex decides which number is bigger
His responses in this test were nothing short of stupendous. Years prior to this, Alex had been taught to recognize physical mass as a qualifier for bigger or smaller. In past learning sessions, he had been asked to determine which key was bigger or smaller when presented with two keys of varying sizes. In this number comprehension test, rather than paying attention to the physical mass of the number symbol, Alex recognized the number as a symbol of numerical value. This proved that he has a true comprehension of the numerical value of a number symbol AND how that number value compared to the otherin short, he recognized ordinality. Alexs Singular Accomplishment Why is this so amazing? One aspect that astounds us is that Alex made the connection himself. As Dr. Pepperberg says, Alex demonstrated that he inferred the ordinal relations among his number symbols without direct training of the one-to-one correspondence between these numbers and their corresponding object sets, and without having been trained to recite the numerals in order. Alex had first been taught the vocal label for set of objects, and had then been taught the vocal label for the number symbol. His agile avian brain made the leap of understanding that the same vocal label represented two very different concepts, a numerical value and the label of a symbol. But Alex made an even bigger leap when he understood that the vocal label for number symbol represented the numerical value of that same vocal label. Of equal importance is Alexs grasp of the relations of numbers to each other. He realized their ordinality by their true numerical value. Alex surpasses chimpanzees in this respect. Chimpanzees can be trained to realize that a written number corresponds to a certain number of objects in a set, but they must be trained in a direct manner, by identifying the written numeral with the object set. A chimps understanding of ordinality was likewise based on a trained comprehension of the numeric symbol based on the number of objects in a set. We humans somehow expect chimpanzees to outperform all other species in assessments of animal intelligence, perhaps because they are so much like us in appearance and social behaviors. But the world must now take notice of this bird, this parrot named Alexa creature so unlike us in appearance but so singular in his ability to assimilate information and draw his own conclusions. And most tellingly, the conclusions he draws prove that he has an intelligence that is comparable to and sometimes surpasses very young human children. What lies ahead for Alex as he progresses in mathematical concepts? Addition? Subtraction? Only through time, donations and the endeavors of Dr. Pepperberg and her staff will we be able to know what Alex can fully accomplish. But one thing is for sure. Were sure Alex has more amazing feats in store for the rest of the world, and that these feats will once again prove the incredible intelligence of African Grey parrots.
Okay. I think I missed the joke...:) Going back now...
BWAAA HAAAAHA AHAAAHHA AHHHA HAAAA HAAA!
THAT'S GREAT! I got COMPLETELY sucked in!!!!
But...I maintain as always, for satire to be effective...it must be somehow distinguishable from reality!
You bring up an interesting perspective. Sure, animals of all kinds have intelligence. Some even more intelligent than humans. But once we've used our intelligence to figure something out, we have the capacity to share that information to others. It's that capacity to share and build upon what we've deduced through our use intelligence that separates us from animals. Mathematics is one good example. Alex the Parrot won't be teaching his wild kin what he has learned. Every generation of parrots or octupi must rediscover what the past generation has. And even then, that information will not be disseminated to others of their species effectively.
Think about it from the octopus's perspective. It can see all these snack swimming around in other neighboring aquariums. And he has nothing to do all day but to figure out how to get to them for a late night snack.
Very well put.
When I was a young man I had the same perspective on female companionship...didn't help me none though!
I hope you are not comparing the application of your intelligence to that of this octapus :)
Well...given my success rate, I would have to give the nod to the octopus!
The octopus sounds like he/she was scoring on a nightly basis for a while!
I had a favorite cat who developed non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. She and I were very close. She stayed alive for a long time, treated with chemotherapy. The night she died, my wife and I were away for several hours. We returned just before she died. I am convinced that she held on until we could get back.
When she was a small kitten, she fell from an upstairs porch and then disappeared. We lived in a city, surrounded by heavy traffic. We put up fliers around the neighborhood; however, after two weeks, one Saturday morning I told my wife to give up hope of finding her, that after two weeks in that neighborhood, she would not come back. My wife said, "No, I think she's going to come back today." Less than 30 minutes later, the telephone rang. It was a neighbor. The kitten was in her front yard.
She gradually became my favorite cat of all time. We had a mystical connection. We still do.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.