Save

An untapped resource: social media accounts show problem solving in numerous new animal species

In: Behaviour
Authors:
Misha K. Rowell College of Science and Engineering, James Cook University, P. O. Box 6811, Cairns, QLD 4870, Australia
Centre for Tropical Environmental and Sustainability Sciences, James Cook University, P.O. Box 6811, Cairns, QLD 4870, Australia

Search for other papers by Misha K. Rowell in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3829-9178
and
Tasmin L. Rymer College of Science and Engineering, James Cook University, P. O. Box 6811, Cairns, QLD 4870, Australia
Centre for Tropical Environmental and Sustainability Sciences, James Cook University, P.O. Box 6811, Cairns, QLD 4870, Australia

Search for other papers by Tasmin L. Rymer in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9963-6345
Online Publication Date:
29 Oct 2024
Open Access

Abstract

Problem solving in animals is often studied by measuring an animal’s ability to solve man-made puzzles, such as puzzle feeders. Outside of scientific studies, puzzle feeders are also presented to captive animals housed in zoos, aquaria, and sanctuaries as a form of enrichment. Footage of these interactions is commonly posted on social media accounts to increase public engagement with the institution. However, because these puzzle feeders are not presented to animals for research purposes, the problem-solving abilities of numerous species may not be recorded in the scientific literature. Therefore, we searched through three social media platforms (Facebook, Instagram and X) for footage of captive animals solving problems to determine if social media could be a useful tool for behavioural scientists. For each video, we recorded what species was featured, what the puzzle was, how it was solved, and whether this was the first documentation of problem solving for the species (to the best of our knowledge). We found 111 records of successful problem solving across 74 species, including mammals ( n = 57), birds ( n = 13), and reptiles ( n = 4). Overall, this was the first record of problem solving in 29 of these species. We suggest that social media could be a useful tool for researchers studying problem solving, particularly of mammalian and avian species.

Keywords: behaviour; cognition; enrichment; problem solving; welfare

1. Introduction

Problem-solving ability is a growing area of animal behaviour and cognition research, largely because it is expected to be important for an animal’s survival (Cole & Quinn, 2012). Problem solving is defined as an animal’s ability to move itself or an object to overcome a barrier and access a reward (Rowell et al., 2021). Animals can solve problems innovatively (using a new behaviour or an existing behaviour in a new context; Reader & Laland, 2003), by using a learned behaviour (Anderson, 1993) or accidentally through trial and error (Tecwyn et al., 2012).

While there are often differences in problem-solving abilities documented between species (Benson-Amram et al., 2016), the problem-solving abilities of the majority of species have not been documented. This is partially due to the challenges of conducting behavioural studies on many species of animals (Rowe & Healy, 2014). For example, for wild-living animals, studying problem solving in the wild has logistical difficulties (e.g., expensive to travel and difficult to access habitat; Desai & Potter, 2006) or the nature of the animals themselves may make research difficult (e.g., rare, elusive, occupy large territories; Pritchard et al., 2016). Similarly, it can be expensive and require many resources (e.g., facilities, funding, staff) for researchers to establish captive colonies of animals, particularly large-bodied or long-lived animals, or animals with specialised requirements. Therefore, it is often more practical to study already established captive populations of animals, such as those in zoos.

Properly managed and accredited zoos, aquaria, gardens, and sanctuaries (hereafter referred to as ‘zoos’) allow species of wild animals to be closely observed by people in an environment designed to facilitate natural behaviours (Rabin, 2003). These institutions generally provide their animals with enrichment items or tasks, including puzzle feeders (e.g., a ball to roll around to release pieces of food) and foraging challenges (e.g., finding food hidden throughout enclosure) to prevent boredom and encourage a wider, and more natural, range of behaviours (Meehan & Mench, 2007). Problem-solving behaviours of the animals during these activities is therefore commonly observed by staff members and is easy to record. This often-entertaining footage is shared with the public on social media to increase public engagement and highlight the positive actions the institution is taking to care for its animals. For example, many zoos provide holiday-themed enrichment items to their animals, and post footage of this to encourage visitation over the holiday season (e.g., Cincinnati Zoo & Botanical Garden: www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=744568294360269&set=a.639373024879797). However, these records have previously not been considered as evidence of problem solving by the scientific community because the footage was not obtained as part of a formal experimental design. Consequently, the scientific literature may have missed many species that can, and do, solve problems.

Therefore, we aimed to gauge whether social media is a viable resource for obtaining evidence of problem solving in captive animals. It is relatively easy to locate problem solving footage on social media, so we searched social media accounts on Facebook, Instagram and X (formerly Twitter) for records of animals successfully solving problems. Our intent was not to do an exhaustive search of all available social media accounts. Rather, we aimed to explore the potential for social media to be an untapped repository of observations of new species being recorded solving puzzles. As this was an exploratory survey, we made no a priori predictions on patterns of problem solving or species occurrences.

2. Methods

We searched social three media platforms (Facebook, Instagram, and X) for accredited zoo accounts or posts tagged with key words including ‘zoo enrichment’, ‘animal enrichment’, and ‘animals solving puzzles’. Due to the large extent of content available, only posts from August 2021 until August 2023 were considered. To broaden our search, we also searched through the last two years of posts on accounts/pages of the top zoos in the world (found using Google searches) and zoos that were prominent on social media.

We watched all videos in these search results. If an animal was recorded solving a problem, we recorded (1) where it was located (if known), (2) the species recorded, (3) the type of problem, (4) how the problem was solved and (5) whether this was the first account of problem solving in this species (to our knowledge), or where the species had previously been described solving a problem (literature search). Videos had to show the problem being solved, not just the animal interacting with a problem, to be considered. We could not extract any information about how long it took to solve the problem, or how the animals interacted with the problem (e.g., latency to approach, total time interacting) as (1) the videos were often edited and made up of multiple sequences clipped together to fit into the platform’s time limits, (2) we did not know how long the animal had access to the puzzle feeder before the video was recorded and (3) we did not know if this was the first instance the puzzle feeders were given to these individuals. We therefore only recorded whether the problem was successfully solved. In addition, we did not record the number of solutions possible in complex puzzles (e.g., puzzle boards with multiple food wells) as we could not necessarily tell this information from all the videos viewed (e.g., sometimes the animal’s body obscured the puzzle). Species in videos were identified by reading the post’s description and/or searching the zoo’s website for a species list. We used Google Scholar to search for previous scientific accounts of problem solving specifically for each species by searching the species name with ‘innovation’ or ‘problem solving’.

3. Results

We collected 111 records of animals solving problems on social media from 41 accredited institutions and multiple accounts of businesses/individuals (Table 1). Details on the location of the animals and a link to the video record can be found in Table A1 in the Appendix. The animals recorded included birds (13 species), mammals (57 species), and reptiles (4 species). Overall, to the best of our knowledge, these records include the first accounts of problem solving in 29 species (39% of records) across these three taxonomic groups (Table 1). Multiple videos showing the presentation of different puzzle types were found for 23 species and these videos therefore often showed different solving behaviours (e.g., pushing, pulling) being used within each species (Table 1).

Table 1.
Table 1.

Records of problem solving in animals from Facebook, Instagram and X posts between August 2021 and August 2023.

Citation: Behaviour 161, 11-12 (2024) ; 10.1163/1568539X-bja10288

Table 1.
Table 1.

(Continued.)

Citation: Behaviour 161, 11-12 (2024) ; 10.1163/1568539X-bja10288

Table 1.
Table 1.

(Continued.)

Citation: Behaviour 161, 11-12 (2024) ; 10.1163/1568539X-bja10288

Table 1.
Table 1.

(Continued.)

Citation: Behaviour 161, 11-12 (2024) ; 10.1163/1568539X-bja10288

Table 1.
Table 1.

(Continued.)

Citation: Behaviour 161, 11-12 (2024) ; 10.1163/1568539X-bja10288

Table 1.
Table 1.

(Continued.)

Citation: Behaviour 161, 11-12 (2024) ; 10.1163/1568539X-bja10288

Table 1.
Table 1.

(Continued.)

Citation: Behaviour 161, 11-12 (2024) ; 10.1163/1568539X-bja10288

Table 1.
Table 1.

(Continued.)

Citation: Behaviour 161, 11-12 (2024) ; 10.1163/1568539X-bja10288

Table 1.
Table 1.

(Continued.)

Citation: Behaviour 161, 11-12 (2024) ; 10.1163/1568539X-bja10288

Table 1.
Table 1.

(Continued.)

Citation: Behaviour 161, 11-12 (2024) ; 10.1163/1568539X-bja10288

Table 1.
Table 1.

(Continued.)

Citation: Behaviour 161, 11-12 (2024) ; 10.1163/1568539X-bja10288

4. Discussion

We searched through two years of posts on social media platforms to investigate whether social media was a viable resource for observing problem solving in captive animals. We documented records of problem solving in 74 species of mammals, birds, and reptiles using key word searches and by searching through prominent social media accounts, many of which had not been previously recorded. This suggests that there is value in monitoring social media platforms for problem solving studies. As a problem can be solved through trial and error learning (Tecwyn et al., 2012), an animal does not have to solve a problem spontaneously or innovatively to be considered capable of problem solving (Rowell et al., 2021). It is therefore not necessary to have a complete understanding of the individual’s behavioural history to document problem solving, and a recorded observation from an institution, such as a zoo, can still sufficiently demonstrate an individual’s ability to solve a problem. With this knowledge, researchers can then work with zoos to continue investigating problem solving in more detail in the species known to solve problems (e.g., individual variation, or consistency in solving over time). Alternatively, a more rigorous search of social media content could be undertaken through a citizen science project to find other records of problem solving, or to investigate other animal behaviour questions (e.g., whether behaviour towards a puzzle changes over time). Importantly, problem solving in captive animals should not be discounted as “ecologically irrelevant” because, while the problems presented may not be encountered in the wild, they still provide valuable insights on cognitive (e.g., learning, Aplin et al., 2013), behavioural (e.g., motivation, van Horik & Madden, 2016) and mechanical (e.g., range of motion, Rowell et al., 2021) processes that are inherent to the individual or species, as well as the capacity of the species, as a whole, to solve problems.

We found large differences in solving records between taxa, with higher numbers of mammals solving puzzle feeders ( n = 57) than birds ( n = 13) or reptiles ( n = 4), and no records of fish, insects, or amphibians even receiving foraging puzzles. The lower number of social media records in these groups is likely not because these taxa are incapable of solving problems, as solving success has been documented in the scientific literature (e.g., various bird species, Sol et al., 2002; multiple monitor lizard species, Cooper et al., 2020; guppies (Poecilia reticulata), Varracchio et al., 2024; brilliant-thighed poison frogs (Allobates femoralis), Munteanu et al., 2016; leaf-cutting ants (Atta colombica0, Dussutour et al., 2009). Instead, it may suggest that (1) puzzle feeders are not frequently presented to non-mammalian species as standard husbandry practice (Varracchio et al., 2024), (2) zoos do not post videos of these animals using their enrichment items, possibly because they may not generate public interest (Snaddon et al., 2008); or (3) our search criteria inadvertently excluded organisations specializing more in aquatic species, such as aquaria. The limit in search results could also be due to the date limitation of the search parameters, as there are older records of fish solving problems on social media (e.g., weather loach Misgurnus anguillicaudatus at the Bristol Zoological Society, https://twitter.com/BrisZooSociety/status/1273276766937927687). Therefore, while useful for studying problem solving in mammals and birds, social media may not be useful for studying problem solving in ‘lower interest’ groups unless more specific search parameters are used, or further work with zoos and aquaria are conducted.

Zoos present animals with foraging tasks to enhance their welfare and wellbeing, and this desktop survey found a large number of puzzle feeder records ( n = 111) across many species ( n = 74). However, it is still unknown what impact puzzle feeders have on animals in captivity broadly. Some studies have reported a positive effect of puzzle feeders on behaviour, including increased foraging behaviour and/or general activity levels (e.g., golden lion tamarins (Leontopithecus rosalia), Sanders & Fernandez, 2022; grey parrots (Psittacus Erithacus), van Zeeland et al., 2013) and decreased abnormal behaviours (e.g., multiple bear species, Swaisgood et al., 2001; Wagman et al., 2018), but this is not always the case. For example, the presence of puzzle feeders did not impact foraging activity levels of squirrel monkeys (Saimiri sciureus) (Spring et al., 1997), rhesus macaques Macaca mulatta (Lee et al., 2008), or gorillas (Gorilla gorilla) (Clark et al., 2019). Additionally, behavioural responses to puzzle feeders are not always straightforward, and can be difficult to interpret (e.g., puzzle feeders increased activity levels but also increased aggression in chimpanzees Pan troglodytes, Padrell et al., 2022). Finally, the physiological responses of animals to puzzle feeders is poorly understood (Meehan & Mench, 2007), making it challenging to directly determine whether feeders are improving an animal’s welfare and affective state. For example, an increase in heart rate is often seen in response to both fear and excitement (Paul et al., 2005). Further research into the effects of puzzle feeders on captive animal welfare is therefore required.

5. Conclusion

Overall, social media appears to be an untapped and useful resource for identifying problem solving in animals, particularly for mammals. This suggests that further work should be done with zoos and their staff to increase the number of species that are exposed to puzzle feeders, to understand the impact of puzzle feeders on animal welfare, and to encourage the posting of videos of ‘less popular’ species, which could further increase the new records of solving successes. This also shows the potential for community education and participation in research using social media. We argue that social media provides researchers with a cheap and easily accessible resource for documenting problem solving in animals and could provide a rich avenue for engaging in citizen science projects in the future.

*

Corresponding author’s e-mail address: misha.rowell@my.jcu.edu.au

Acknowledgement

The authors acknowledge the owners of the social media accounts referenced in this study.

References

  • Anderson, J.R. (1993). Problem solving and learning. — Am. Psychol. 10: 35-44.

  • Aplin, L.M., Sheldon, B.C. & Morand-Ferron, J. (2013). Milk bottles revisited: social learning and individual variation in the blue tit, Cyanistes caeruleus. — Anim. Behav. 85: 1225-1232. DOI:10.1016/j.anbehav.2013.03.009.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Benson-Amram, S., Dantzer, B., Stricker, G., Swanson, E.M. & Holekamp, K.E. (2016). Brain size predicts problem-solving ability in mammalian carnivores. — Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 113: 2532-2537.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Bouchard, J., Goodyer, W. & Lefebvre, L. (2007). Social learning and innovation are positively correlated in pigeons (Columba livia). — Anim. Cogn. 10: 259-266.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Caicoya, A.L., Schaffer, A., Holland, R., von Fersen, L., Colell, M. & Amici, F. (2023). Innovation across 13 ungulate species: problem solvers are less integrated in the social group and less neophobic. — Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. B: Biol. Sci. 290: 20222384. DOI:10.1098/rspb.2022.2384.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Cameron, R. & Rogers, L.J. (1999). Hand preference of the common marmoset (Callithrix jacchus): problem solving and responses in a novel setting. — J. Comp. Psychol. 113: 149-157. DOI:10.1037/0735-7036.113.2.149.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Clark, F.E., Gray, S.I., Bennett, P., Mason, L.J. & Burgess, K.V. (2019). High-Tech and tactile: cognitive enrichment for zoo-housed gorillas. — Front. Psychol. 10: 1574. DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01574.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Clavel, M.G.G., Youngblood, M. & Lahti, D. (2020). Relationship between personality and cognitive traits in domestic rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus). — bioRxiv. DOI:10.1101/2020.10.12.336024.

  • Colbert-White, E.N., McCord, E.M., Sharpe, D.I. & Fragaszy, D.M. (2013). String-pulling behaviour in a Harris’s Hawk Parabuteo unicinctus. — Ibis 155: 611-615. DOI:10.1111/ibi.12040.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Cole, E.F. & Quinn, J.L. (2012). Personality and problem-solving performance explain competitive ability in the wild. — Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. B: Biol. Sci. 279: 1168-1175. DOI:10.1098/rspb.2011.1539.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Cooper, T.L., Zabinski, C.L., Adams, E.J., Berry, S.M., Pardo-Sanchez, J., Reinhardt, E.M., Roberts, K.M., Watzek, J., Brosnan, S.F., Hill, R.L., Weigel, E.G. & Mendelson III, J.R. (2020). Long-term memory of a complex foraging task in Monitor lizards (Reptilia: Squamata: Varanidae). — J. Herpetol. 54: 378-383. DOI:10.1670/19-122.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Cunningham, C.L., Anderson, J.R. & Mootnick, A.R. (2006). Object manipulation to obtain a food reward in hoolock gibbons, Bunopithecus hoolock. — Anim. Behav. 71: 621-629. DOI:10.1016/j.anbehav.2005.05.013.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Dabhelia, M. (2022). Decision-making during problem-solving and innovation in an urban dwelling population of yellow mongooses (Cynictis penicillata). Thesis, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg.

  • Desai, V. & Potter, R.B. (2006). Doing development research. — Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.

  • Dussutour, A., Deneubourg, J.-L., Beshers, S. & Fourcassié, V. (2009). Individual and collective problem-solving in a foraging context in the leaf-cutting ant Atta colombica. — Anim. Cogn. 12: 21-30.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Esch, L., Wöhr, C., Erhard, M. & Krüger, K. (2019). Horses’ (Equus caballus) laterality, stress hormones, and task related behavior in innovative problem-solving. — Animals 9: 265. DOI:10.3390/ani9050265.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Foerder, P., Galloway, M., Barthel, T., Iii, D.E.M. & Reiss, D. (2011). Insightful problem solving in an Asian elephant. — PLoS ONE 6: e23251. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0023251.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Gajdon, G.K., Fijn, N. & Huber, L. (2006). Limited spread of innovation in a wild parrot, the kea (Nestor notabilis). — Anim. Cogn. 9: 173-181. DOI:10.1007/s10071-006-0018-7.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Harrington, K.J., Folkertsma, R., Auersperg, A.M.I., Biondi, L. & Lambert, M.L. (2023). Innovative problem solving by wild falcons. — Curr. Biol. 34: 190-195.e3. DOI:10.1016/j.cub.2023.10.061.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Hauser, M.D., Kralik, J. & Botto-Mahan, C. (1999). Problem solving and functional design features: experiments on cotton-top tamarins, Saguinus oedipus oedipus. — Anim. Behav. 57: 565-582.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Hopper, L.M., Price, S.A., Freeman, H.D., Lambeth, S.P., Schapiro, S.J. & Kendal, R.L. (2014). Influence of personality, age, sex, and estrous state on chimpanzee problem-solving success. — Anim. Cogn. 17: 835-847. DOI:10.1007/s10071-013-0715-y.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Howard, M. (2018). Socialization and problem-solving in domestic cats (Felis catus). Thesis, The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN.

  • Jønsson, K.A., Fabre, P.H. & Irestedt, M. (2012). Brains, tools, innovation and biogeography in crows and ravens. — BMC Evol. Biol. 12: 72. DOI:10.1186/1471-2148-12-72.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Kittler, K., Kappeler, P.M. & Fichtel, C. (2018). Instrumental problem-solving abilities in three lemur species (Microcebus murinus, Varecia variegata, and Lemur catta). — J. Comp. Psychol. 132: 306-314. DOI:10.1037/com0000113.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Klump, B.C., Martin, J.M., Wild, S., Hörsch, J.K., Major, R.E. & Aplin, L.M. (2021). Innovation and geographic spread of a complex foraging culture in an urban parrot. — Science 373: 456-460. DOI:10.1126/science.abe7808.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Laumer, I.B., Call, J., Bugnyar, T. & Auersperg, A.M.I. (2018). Spontaneous innovation of hook-bending and unbending in orangutans (Pongo abelii). — Sci. Rep. 8: 16518. DOI:10.1038/s41598-018-34607-0.