Animal intelligence: Experimental studiesThorndike, Edward L. (Edward Lee)
Science
Animal intelligence: Experimental studies
Thorndike, Edward L. (Edward Lee)
Animal intelligence; Psychology, Comparative
Up to thirty days there was no fear of a mocking bird into whose cage
the chicks were put, no fear of a stuffed hawk or a stuffed owl (kept
stationary). Chicks try to escape from water (even though warmed to the
temperature of their bodies) from the very first. Up to forty days there
appears no marked waning of the instinct. They did not show any emotional
reaction to the flame produced by six candles stuck closely together.
From the start they react instinctively to confinement, to loneliness,
to bodily restraint, but their feeling in these cases would better be
called discomfort than fear. From the 10th or 12th to the 20th day, and
probably later and very possibly earlier, one notices in chicks a general
avoidance of open places. Turn them out in your study and they will not
go out into the middle of the room, but will cling to the edges, go under
chairs, around table legs and along the walls. One sees nothing of the
sort up through the fourth day. Some experiments with feeding hive bees
to the chicks are interesting in connection with the following statement
by Lloyd Morgan: “One of my chicks, three or four days old, snapped up
a hive bee and ran off with it. Then he dropped it, shook his head much
and often, and wiped his bill repeatedly. I do not think he had been
stung: _probably he tasted the poison_” (‘Introduction to Comparative
Psychology,’ p. 86). I fed seven bees apiece to three chicks from ten to
twenty days old. _They ate them all greedily_, first smashing them down
on the ground violently in a rather dexterous manner. Apparently this
method of treatment is peculiar to the object. Chicks _three_ days old
did not eat the bees. Some pecked at them, but none would snap them up,
and when the bee approached, they sometimes sounded the danger note.
Finally an account may be given of the reaction of chicks at different
ages, up to twenty-six days, to loud sounds. These were the sounds made
by clapping the hands, slamming a door, whistling sharply, banging a tin
pan on the floor, mewing like a cat, playing a violin, thumping a coal
scuttle with a shovel, etc. Two chicks were together in each experiment.
Three fourths of the times no effect was produced. On the other occasions
there was some running or crouching or, at least, starting to run or
crouch; but, as was said, nothing like what Spalding reports as the
reaction to the ‘cheep’ of the hawk. It is interesting to notice that
the two most emphatic reactions were to the imitation mew. One time a
chick ran wildly, chirring, and then crouched and stayed still until I
had counted 105. The other time a chick crouched and stayed still until I
counted 40. But the other chick with them did not; and in a dozen other
cases the ‘meaw’ had no effect.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account