啄羊鸚鵡是新西蘭的一種高山鸚鵡，這種以淘氣著稱的鸚鵡，最近卻因科學家們的一項發現“名噪一時”。相關研究機構稱，啄羊鸚鵡能夠理解概率，實是一項令人印象深刻的智力壯舉。
Scientists studying kea, New Zealand's alpine parrot, revealed that the famously mischievous birds could understand probabilities, an impressive mental feat.
新西蘭啄羊鸚鵡
新西蘭奧克蘭大學的Amalia Bastos和Alex Taylor設計並開展了一系列實驗，分別觀察六隻鸚鵡在面對不確定性時如何做出決定。當被要求做出選擇時，啄羊鸚鵡通常會選擇更有可能獲得獎勵的場景。根據《自然通訊》上的論文，這項工作進一步證明了某些鳥類具有一般智力。
Amalia Bastos and Alex Taylor of the University of Auckland, New Zealand designed and conducted a series of experiments to observe how six parrots make decisions in the face of uncertainty. When prompted to choose, the kea generally opted for scenarios where they were more likely to earn a reward. This work is further evidence of some birds' general intelligence, according to the paper published in Nature Communications.
Amalia Bastos說：“啄羊鸚鵡是一種只存在於新西蘭南島的鸚鵡。它們也是世界上唯一生活在高山地區的鸚鵡，那裡寒冷而惡劣的環境下食物資源缺乏。這種食物匱乏可能是它們求知慾很強的原因，它們能夠很容易地評估潛在的新食物來源，這對它們的生存至關重要。”
"Kea are a species of parrot that exists only in the South Island of New Zealand. They are also the only parrot in the world to live in the alpine mountains, a cold and harsh environment where food resources can be scarce, Amalia Bastos told Gizmodo. "This food scarcity is probably the reason why they are highly inquisitiveit is essential to their survival that they can readily assess potential new sources of food."
第一個實驗向啄羊鸚鵡展示了裝有黑色和橙色標記混合物的罐子(黑色標記會給他們獎勵;橙色不會給他們任何東西)。首先，實驗者將一隻手放入裝有100個黑色標記和20個橙色標記的罐子中，另一隻手放入裝有相反數量的罐子中在20個實驗中，6只啄羊鸚鵡中的3個立即表現出對有更多黑色標記的手的偏好。
The first experiment presented kea with jars containing a mixture of black and orange tokens (a black token would get them a reward; the orange would get them nothing). First, the experimenter would put one hand into a jar with 100 black tokens and 20 orange tokens and the other hand into a jar with the reverse quantities. Within 20 trials, three of the six kea immediately showed a preference for the hand that went into the jar with more black tokens.
版權 : Amalia Bastos
然後，為了測試啄羊鸚鵡是僅僅考慮數量還是考慮實際的概率，他們給了這些鳥一個罐子，裡面有20個黑色標記和100個橙色標記，另一個罐子裡有20個黑色標記和4個橙色標記。在前20次試驗中，4只啄羊鸚鵡立即選擇了從獲得獎勵的概率更高的罐子裡的那隻手。
Then, to test whether the kea were just thinking about quantities or if they were considering actual probabilities, they presented the birds with one jar containing 20 black tokens and 100 orange tokens and another with 20 black tokens and four orange tokens. Four kea immediately preferred the hand from the jar with better odds in the first 20 trials.
最後，啄羊鸚鵡在一個有63個橙色標記和57個黑色標記的罐子上與另一個有63個橙色標記和3個黑色標記的罐子進行對比，所有的啄羊鸚鵡成員在前20次試驗中都選擇了獲獎率更高的罐子。
Finally, the kea were tested on a jar with 63 orange tokens and 57 black tokens versus another with 63 orange tokens and three black tokensall of the kea preferred the jar with the better odds in the first 20 trials.
然後，研究人員讓事情變得更加困難。他們給啄羊鸚鵡看了兩個瓶子，瓶子中間有一道柵欄。每個罐子裡都有相等數量的橙色和黑色的標記，但在一個罐子裡，屏障上方的區域比另一個區域有更多的黑色標記。6只啄羊鸚鵡中有5只更喜歡前20個實驗中能給他們更好機會的罐子，這表明他們能把障礙的知識整合到對概率的理解中。
Then, the researchers made things a little tougher. They showed the kea two jars where a barrier had been placed halfway down. Each jar contained equal numbers of orange and black tokens, but in one jar, the region above the barrier had way more black tokens than the other. Five of the six kea preferred the jar that would give them better odds for a treat within the first 20 trials, showing that they could integrate the knowledge of the barrier into their understanding of the probability.
最後測試，研究者進行了第三個實驗，以兩種不同的人類樣本描述成“有偏見的”或“公正的”，取樣器總是給啄羊鸚鵡黑色標記，但是偏見取樣器伸入的罐子裡主要是橙色標記，而公正取樣器伸入的罐子裡大部分是黑色標記。6只啄羊鸚鵡中有3只選擇了偏見取樣器。研究人員解釋:“如果啄羊鸚鵡明白偏見取樣器確實是偏向於選擇有益的標記，而公正取樣器只選擇與偏見取樣器頻率相同的獎勵標記，那麼啄羊鸚鵡應該在測試時選擇有偏見取樣器。這是因為，儘管公正採樣器現在有可能在一半的時間裡選擇獎勵標記，但有偏採見取樣器應該在每次試驗中繼續選擇獎勵標記。”
Advertisement Finally, the researchers performed a third experiment in which two different human samplers were portrayed as "biased" or "unbiased;" the samplers would always give the kea black tokens, but the biased sampler would reach into jars with mostly orange tokens, while the unbiased sampler would reach into the jar with mostly black tokens. Three of the six kea chose the biased sampler more often than chance. As the researchers explain it: "If the kea understood that the biased sampler was indeed biased to choose a rewarding token, while the unbiased sampler had only been choosing rewarding tokens at the same frequency as the biased sampler due to the populations they were sampling from, kea should choose the biased sampler at test. This was because while the unbiased sampler would now be likely to choose a rewarding token half the time, the biased sampler should continue to choose the rewarding token in every trial."
另外，這些鸚鵡的名字分別是布洛菲爾德（Blofeld）、布魯斯（Bruce）、洛基（Loki）、尼歐（Neo）、浮游生物（Plankton）和小鬍子（Taz）。
Importantly, you should know that the birds were named Blofeld, Bruce, Loki, Neo, Plankton, and Taz.
研究鸚鵡概率推理的哈佛大學心理學助理研究員艾琳·佩珀伯格（Irene Pepperberg）告訴Gizmodo網站，啄羊鸚鵡在直覺統計任務上的表現可以與猿類媲美，這一事實令人興奮。但她爭辯說，也許報紙上關於高山鸚鵡能力的一些說法太過強烈了。她覺得這些研究並沒有充分表明這些鳥兒瞭解不同的幾率會如何影響它們的獎勵。
The fact that the kea could perform as well as apes on intuitive statistic tasks is exciting, Irene Pepperberg, research associate in psychology at Harvard University who has studied probabilistic reasoning in parrots, told Gizmodo. But she argued that perhaps some of the paper's claims about the abilities of the kea were too strong. She felt that the studies didn't sufficiently show that the birds understood how different odds could impact their rewards.
儘管如此，對鸚鵡的實驗繼續證明，它們身上發生的事情比你想象的要多，這至少包括對機率的基本瞭解。這些或許有助於我們進一步認識統計推斷的演化歷史。
Even still, experiments on parrots continue to demonstrate that there's more going on between their ear holes than you might assumeand that includes at least a basic understanding of odds.These may help us further understand the evolutionary history of statistical inference.
Reference: Gizmodo·Sicience
閱讀更多 精聞 的文章
