Mirror-Induced Behavior in the Magpie ( Pica pica ): Evidence of Self-Recognition methods
Aim. Evidence-backed execution summary for Mirror-Induced Behavior in the Magpie ( Pica pica ): Evidence of Self-Recognition methods from Mirror-Induced Behavior in the Magpie ( Pica pica ): Evidence of Self-Recognition.
Show snapshot details
On this page
This experiment, in seven questions
Jump straight to the part of the recipe you need. Data and provenance labels stay close to the action they support.
Shopping and prep list
What do I need before I start?
human
Subject model for the experiment.
- Use
- confirm full cohort details in the source paper
Materials and Methods
In a 4 × 4-m room, a mirror 55-cm wide and 40-cm high was placed on the ground, leaning against a pole, and slightly tilted. The position of the mirror was in the middle of one of the walls with about 1.5-m distance from the wall, allowing the birds to move around the mirror. The tested subject could move freel...
- Use
- In a 4 × 4-m room, a mirror 55-cm wide and 40-cm high was placed on the ground, leaning against a pole, and slightly tilted. The position of the mirror was in the middle of one of the walls with about 1.5-m distance from the wall, allowing the birds to move around the mirror. The tested subject could move freel...
Scoring of behaviors.
While the birds were being set into or removed from the experimental cage, room lights were switched off. A test began by turning the lights on. Experiments were monitored via a video system from an adjacent room, and all tests were videotaped. From videotapes, the frequency of behaviors directed towards the own bod...
- Use
- While the birds were being set into or removed from the experimental cage, room lights were switched off. A test began by turning the lights on. Experiments were monitored via a video system from an adjacent room, and all tests were videotaped. From videotapes, the frequency of behaviors directed towards the own bod...
Supporting Information
Nine video clips that show relevant behavioral sequences for the subjects Gerti, Goldie, Harvey, and Schatzi.
- Use
- Nine video clips that show relevant behavioral sequences for the subjects Gerti, Goldie, Harvey, and Schatzi.
Before you run
What should be confirmed before execution?
First confirmation
Equipment is listed but no product mappings are linked.
Confirm before execution
This page is backed by a publishable Replication Data Ledger package with zero critical source-verification issues.
Confirm before execution
Open the source paper before finalizing run-specific details.
Procurement checkpoint
Use source-stated vendors where present. Treat mapped products as sourcing options unless the page marks an exact source match.
Open quote workflowStep-by-step procedure
What do I do, in order?
Materials and Methods
In a 4 × 4-m room, a mirror 55-cm wide and 40-cm high was placed on the ground, leaning against a pole, and slightly tilted. The position of the mirror was in the middle of one of the walls with about 1.5-m distance from the wall, allowing the birds to move around the mirror. The tested subject could move freely in the room. After a baseline trial with the mirror replaced by a grey, nonreflective plate, five test sessions of 30-min duration were given to each of the birds. The behavior of the birds was observed from an adjacent room by means of a video system, and trials were videotaped.
Mirror preference and standardized mirror exploration.
For a quantitative estimation of the interest in the mirror, a cage with two opposite compartments was used. Compartments 60 × 100 × 60 cm (length × height × width) were identical except that there was a mirror at the end of one of the compartments and a grey, nonreflective plate of the same size in the other compartment. Between the compartments, there was a partition with two overlapping walls so that the birds could move freely between compartments but could not see from one compartment into the other. Each of the birds received five consecutive trials of 20 min on separate days. The time the birds spent in the compartment with the mirror was measured, and based of the videotapes bouts of close mirror inspection, looks behind the mirror, bouts of contingent behavior, and social behaviors were counted.
Mark test.
In the mark test, each subject was involved in eight test sessions with the conditions, (1) mirror and colored mark, (2) mirror and black mark, (3) no mirror with colored mark, and (4) no mirror with black mark. One session lasted 20 min. Each condition was replicated once, and two colors, either yellow or red, were used for the colored mark. Thus, our subjects were marked in all conditions to prevent cueing by somesthetic input, but the black mark in condition 2 was practically not visible on the black feathers of the throat. Such sham marking, which also had been used in studies with dolphins and elephants [, ], has the advantage that no anesthesia is needed, and it provides a rather rigorous control as except for the difference in appearance, every detail of the procedure is perfectly matched to the conditions with a color mark. In the no-mirror controls, the mirror was replaced b...
Scoring of behaviors.
Before the first mark test, birds were familiarized with the experimental cage and the mirror for at least 5 d. The experimental cage was 120 × 100 × 60 cm (l × h × w) and had a grid floor. The walls also consisted of a grid except for one long wall, which in most of the tests consisted of Plexiglas in order to provide a good view of the bird. The mirror or the nonreflective plate was always placed on the ground at the same short wall of the cage.
Scoring of behaviors.
At the beginning of a test, a bird was taken from its home cage and brought to an adjacent room, where the colored mark or the control mark was fixed. The bird was held by one of the experimenters such that the throat region below the beak was exposed. The head of the bird was shielded by the hand of the experimenter holding the bird so that the bird could not see the fixing procedure. The other experimenter then fixed the self-adhesive colored or black mark. Except for the color of the mark, the handling procedure was exactly the same in each of the experimental conditions. Although the dots used for marking were self-adhesive, we prepared them with double-sided adhesive tape in order to ensure good fixation. The weight of a dot was 16 µg and the diameter 8 mm.
Scoring of behaviors.
After completion of testing of all birds in each of the conditions twice, further tests were applied for the subject Gerti, who showed very clear and consistent self-directed behavior. First of all, a mirror test with four consecutive phases of 5 min was carried out, and in each phase, a new mark was fixed (yellow, blue, black, or red). Secondly, additional tests comparing the behavior in the colored mark and mirror condition with that in the colored mark and no-mirror condition were carried out with a normal cage grid instead of a Plexiglas wall in front of the cage. In experiments with dolphins [ ], the interpretation of the subjects' behaviors was complicated by the fact that the animals had apparently used the reflecting sidewalls of their pool in addition to the mirror provided by the experimenters. Although reflectance by the Plexiglas front was not likely, we sought additional...
Measurement outputs
What raw and processed outputs should exist?
In these tests, birds could choose between two identical compartments of a cage, one equipped with a mirror and the other with a nonreflective plate instead of the mirror. gives...
- Raw artifact
- Per-sample or per-animal endpoint measurements collected during the experiment
- Processed artifact
- Structured table with cleaned measurements ready for comparison
- Reported as
- Summary statistics and between-group or across-timepoint comparisons
In a first exposure to a mirror with a mark, three out of five birds showed at least one instance of spontaneous self-directed behavior (see for an example in the subject Schatz...
- Raw artifact
- Per-sample or per-animal endpoint measurements collected during the experiment
- Processed artifact
- Structured table with cleaned measurements ready for comparison
- Reported as
- Summary statistics and between-group or across-timepoint comparisons
Orange bars refer to tests with a colored mark (yellow or red), black bars to tests with a black control mark (sham condition). In Gerti ( p < 0.005, Fisher exact test), as well...
- Raw artifact
- Per-sample or per-animal endpoint measurements collected during the experiment
- Processed artifact
- Structured table with cleaned measurements ready for comparison
- Reported as
- Summary statistics and between-group or across-timepoint comparisons
(A) Proportion of mark-directed behavior by Gerti in a test session with change of marks in consecutive 5-min intervals. The color of each bar refers to the color of the mark us...
- Raw artifact
- Per-sample or per-animal endpoint measurements collected during the experiment
- Processed artifact
- Structured table with cleaned measurements ready for comparison
- Reported as
- Summary statistics and between-group or across-timepoint comparisons
Analysis plan
How should the outputs become interpretable results?
Acquisition
Collect raw experimental outputs with enough metadata to preserve sample identity, condition, and timing.
inferred from protocolPreprocessing / cleaning
In a first exposure to a mirror with a mark, three out of five birds showed at least one instance of spontaneous self-directed behavior (see for an example in the subject Schatzi).
from paperScoring or quantification
Quantify the primary readouts for this experiment: In these tests, birds could choose between two identical compartments of a cage, one equipped with a mirror and the other with a nonreflective plate instead of the mirror. gives...; In a first exposure to a mirror with a mark, three out of five birds showed at least one instance of spontaneous self-directed behavior (see for an example in the subject Schatz...; Orange bars refer to tests with a colored mark (yellow or red), black bars to tests with a black control mark (sham condition). In Gerti ( p < 0.005, Fisher exact test), as well...; (A) Proportion of mark-directed behavior by Gerti in a test session with change of marks in consecutive 5-min intervals. The color of each bar refers to the color of the mark us....
from paperStatistical comparison
In a first exposure to a mirror with a mark, three out of five birds showed at least one instance of spontaneous self-directed behavior (see for an example in the subject Schatz...; Two of the other three birds reacted to the mirror with excited behavior characterized by frequent jumping and running within the cage, and the last bird showed a high number of...
from paperReporting output
Report representative outputs alongside summary comparisons for In these tests, birds could choose between two identical compartments of a cage, one equipped with a mirror and the other with a nonreflective plate instead of the mirror. gives..., In a first exposure to a mirror with a mark, three out of five birds showed at least one instance of spontaneous self-directed behavior (see for an example in the subject Schatz..., Orange bars refer to tests with a colored mark (yellow or red), black bars to tests with a black control mark (sham condition). In Gerti ( p < 0.005, Fisher exact test), as well..., (A) Proportion of mark-directed behavior by Gerti in a test session with change of marks in consecutive 5-min intervals. The color of each bar refers to the color of the mark us....
inferred from protocolStructured statistical methods
In a first exposure to a mirror with a mark, three out of five birds showed at least one instance of spontaneous self-directed behavior (see for an example in the subject Schatz...; Two of the other three birds reacted to the mirror with excited behavior characterized by frequent jumping and running within the cage, and the last bird showed a high number of...
source structuredSource and audit
What supports the facts on this page?
Evidence quotes (6)
In a 4 × 4-m room, a mirror 55-cm wide and 40-cm high was placed on the ground, leaning against a pole, and slightly tilted. The position of the mirror was in the middle of one of the walls with about 1.5-m distance from the wall, allowing the birds to move around the mirror. The tested subject could move freely in the room. After a baseline trial with the mirror replaced by a grey, nonreflective plate, five test sessions of 30-min duration were given to each of the birds. The behavior of the birds was observed from an adjacent room by means of a video system, and trials were videotaped.
For a quantitative estimation of the interest in the mirror, a cage with two opposite compartments was used. Compartments 60 × 100 × 60 cm (length × height × width) were identical except that there was a mirror at the end of one of the compartments and a grey, nonreflective plate of the same size in the other compartment. Between the compartments, there was a partition with two overlapping walls so that the birds could move freely between compartments but could not see from one compartment into the other. Each of the birds received five consecutive trials of 20 min on separate days. The time the birds spent in the compartment with the mirror was measured, and based of the videotapes bouts of close mirror inspection, looks behind the mirror, bouts of contingent behavior, and social behaviors were counted.
In the mark test, each subject was involved in eight test sessions with the conditions, (1) mirror and colored mark, (2) mirror and black mark, (3) no mirror with colored mark, and (4) no mirror with black mark. One session lasted 20 min. Each condition was replicated once, and two colors, either yellow or red, were used for the colored mark. Thus, our subjects were marked in all conditions to prevent cueing by somesthetic input, but the black mark in condition 2 was practically not visible on the black feathers of the throat. Such sham marking, which also had been used in studies with dolphins and elephants [, ], has the advantage that no anesthesia is needed, and it provides a rather rigorous control as except for the difference in appearance, every detail of the procedure is perfectly matched to the conditions with a color mark. In the no-mirror controls, the mirror was replaced by a nonreflective flat grey plate of the same size and in the same position. Conditions, including usage of the two marking colors yellow and red, alternated in balanced order. Colored marks and black control marks were fixed below the beak onto the throat region ( ). Different pigeon breeds are bli...
Before the first mark test, birds were familiarized with the experimental cage and the mirror for at least 5 d. The experimental cage was 120 × 100 × 60 cm (l × h × w) and had a grid floor. The walls also consisted of a grid except for one long wall, which in most of the tests consisted of Plexiglas in order to provide a good view of the bird. The mirror or the nonreflective plate was always placed on the ground at the same short wall of the cage.
At the beginning of a test, a bird was taken from its home cage and brought to an adjacent room, where the colored mark or the control mark was fixed. The bird was held by one of the experimenters such that the throat region below the beak was exposed. The head of the bird was shielded by the hand of the experimenter holding the bird so that the bird could not see the fixing procedure. The other experimenter then fixed the self-adhesive colored or black mark. Except for the color of the mark, the handling procedure was exactly the same in each of the experimental conditions. Although the dots used for marking were self-adhesive, we prepared them with double-sided adhesive tape in order to ensure good fixation. The weight of a dot was 16 µg and the diameter 8 mm.
After completion of testing of all birds in each of the conditions twice, further tests were applied for the subject Gerti, who showed very clear and consistent self-directed behavior. First of all, a mirror test with four consecutive phases of 5 min was carried out, and in each phase, a new mark was fixed (yellow, blue, black, or red). Secondly, additional tests comparing the behavior in the colored mark and mirror condition with that in the colored mark and no-mirror condition were carried out with a normal cage grid instead of a Plexiglas wall in front of the cage. In experiments with dolphins [ ], the interpretation of the subjects' behaviors was complicated by the fact that the animals had apparently used the reflecting sidewalls of their pool in addition to the mirror provided by the experimenters. Although reflectance by the Plexiglas front was not likely, we sought additional controls to ensure that the presence or absence of the mirror was the only predictor of differences in mark-directed behavior.
Machine-readable layer
[
{
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@type": "HowTo",
"name": "Mirror-Induced Behavior in the Magpie ( Pica pica ): Evidence of Self-Recognition methods",
"description": "Evidence-backed execution summary for Mirror-Induced Behavior in the Magpie ( Pica pica ): Evidence of Self-Recognition methods from Mirror-Induced Behavior in the Magpie ( Pica pica ): Evidence of Self-Recognition.",
"totalTime": "PT45M",
"step": [
{
"@type": "HowToStep",
"position": 1,
"name": "Materials and Methods",
"text": "In a 4 × 4-m room, a mirror 55-cm wide and 40-cm high was placed on the ground, leaning against a pole, and slightly tilted. The position of the mirror was in the middle of one of the walls with about 1.5-m distance from the wall, allowing the birds to move around the mirror. The tested subject could move freely in the room. After a baseline trial with the mirror replaced by a grey, nonreflective plate, five test sessions of 30-min duration were given to each of the birds. The behavior of the birds was observed from an adjacent room by means of a video system, and trials were videotaped."
},
{
"@type": "HowToStep",
"position": 2,
"name": "Mirror preference and standardized mirror exploration.",
"text": "For a quantitative estimation of the interest in the mirror, a cage with two opposite compartments was used. Compartments 60 × 100 × 60 cm (length × height × width) were identical except that there was a mirror at the end of one of the compartments and a grey, nonreflective plate of the same size in the other compartment. Between the compartments, there was a partition with two overlapping walls so that the birds could move freely between compartments but could not see from one compartment into the other. Each of the birds received five consecutive trials of 20 min on separate days. The time the birds spent in the compartment with the mirror was measured, and based of the videotapes bouts of close mirror inspection, looks behind the mirror, bouts of contingent behavior, and social behaviors were counted."
},
{
"@type": "HowToStep",
"position": 3,
"name": "Mark test.",
"text": "In the mark test, each subject was involved in eight test sessions with the conditions, (1) mirror and colored mark, (2) mirror and black mark, (3) no mirror with colored mark, and (4) no mirror with black mark. One session lasted 20 min. Each condition was replicated once, and two colors, either yellow or red, were used for the colored mark. Thus, our subjects were marked in all conditions to prevent cueing by somesthetic input, but the black mark in condition 2 was practically not visible on the black feathers of the throat. Such sham marking, which also had been used in studies with dolphins and elephants [, ], has the advantage that no anesthesia is needed, and it provides a rather rigorous control as except for the difference in appearance, every detail of the procedure is perfectly matched to the conditions with a color mark. In the no-mirror controls, the mirror was replaced b..."
},
{
"@type": "HowToStep",
"position": 4,
"name": "Scoring of behaviors.",
"text": "Before the first mark test, birds were familiarized with the experimental cage and the mirror for at least 5 d. The experimental cage was 120 × 100 × 60 cm (l × h × w) and had a grid floor. The walls also consisted of a grid except for one long wall, which in most of the tests consisted of Plexiglas in order to provide a good view of the bird. The mirror or the nonreflective plate was always placed on the ground at the same short wall of the cage."
},
{
"@type": "HowToStep",
"position": 5,
"name": "Scoring of behaviors.",
"text": "At the beginning of a test, a bird was taken from its home cage and brought to an adjacent room, where the colored mark or the control mark was fixed. The bird was held by one of the experimenters such that the throat region below the beak was exposed. The head of the bird was shielded by the hand of the experimenter holding the bird so that the bird could not see the fixing procedure. The other experimenter then fixed the self-adhesive colored or black mark. Except for the color of the mark, the handling procedure was exactly the same in each of the experimental conditions. Although the dots used for marking were self-adhesive, we prepared them with double-sided adhesive tape in order to ensure good fixation. The weight of a dot was 16 µg and the diameter 8 mm."
},
{
"@type": "HowToStep",
"position": 6,
"name": "Scoring of behaviors.",
"text": "After completion of testing of all birds in each of the conditions twice, further tests were applied for the subject Gerti, who showed very clear and consistent self-directed behavior. First of all, a mirror test with four consecutive phases of 5 min was carried out, and in each phase, a new mark was fixed (yellow, blue, black, or red). Secondly, additional tests comparing the behavior in the colored mark and mirror condition with that in the colored mark and no-mirror condition were carried out with a normal cage grid instead of a Plexiglas wall in front of the cage. In experiments with dolphins [ ], the interpretation of the subjects' behaviors was complicated by the fact that the animals had apparently used the reflecting sidewalls of their pool in addition to the mirror provided by the experimenters. Although reflectance by the Plexiglas front was not likely, we sought additional..."
}
],
"tool": [
{
"@type": "HowToTool",
"name": "Materials and Methods"
},
{
"@type": "HowToTool",
"name": "Scoring of behaviors."
},
{
"@type": "HowToTool",
"name": "Supporting Information"
}
],
"supply": [],
"isBasedOn": {
"@type": "ScholarlyArticle",
"headline": "Mirror-Induced Behavior in the Magpie ( Pica pica ): Evidence of Self-Recognition",
"datePublished": "2008",
"author": [
{
"@type": "Person",
"name": "Helmut Prior"
},
{
"@type": "Person",
"name": "Ariane Schwarz"
},
{
"@type": "Person",
"name": "Onur Güntürkün"
}
],
"identifier": "10.1126/science.167.3914.86"
}
},
{
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@type": "BreadcrumbList",
"itemListElement": [
{
"@type": "ListItem",
"position": 1,
"name": "Experiments",
"item": "https://replicatescience.com/experiments"
},
{
"@type": "ListItem",
"position": 2,
"name": "Mirror-Induced Behavior in the Magpie ( Pica pica ): Evidence of Self-Recognition methods",
"item": "https://replicatescience.com/experiments/mirror-induced-behavior-in-the-magpie-pica-pica-evidence-of-self-recognition-methods-helmut-prior-pmc2517622/mirror-induced-behavior-in-the-magpie-pica-pica-evidence-of-self-recognition-mlph7rse"
}
]
}
]