Crow problem-solving
The Bird That Thinks Ahead Three Steps
Crows can plan for the future — and in at least one experiment, they outperformed great apes doing it.
The Idea
For most of the twentieth century, the ability to mentally simulate future events was considered a uniquely human trait, sometimes called 'mental time travel.' The reasoning went: only we can detach from the present moment, project ourselves forward, and act on what we imagine. Then corvids — the family that includes crows, ravens, rooks, and jays — started ruining that story. What makes crow cognition so striking isn't just that they use tools. Plenty of animals do. What's remarkable is that they show what researchers call 'flexible, multi-step planning' — the ability to hold a goal in mind, anticipate what will be needed to reach it, and sequence actions accordingly, even when those actions aren't immediately rewarding. This requires what cognitive scientists call 'prospective cognition': acting now for a future state you can only imagine. Crows also demonstrate causal reasoning — not just trial-and-error learning, but an apparent grasp of why something works. When presented with a novel problem, they don't just repeat previously rewarded behaviours; they reason about the physical structure of the situation. Neuroscientists have found that the corvid pallium — a region of the brain that has no mammalian equivalent but performs analogous functions to the prefrontal cortex — supports this kind of flexible, context-sensitive thinking. Evolution, it turns out, found intelligence twice: once in primates, and once in birds whose last common ancestor with us lived over 300 million years ago.
In the World
In 2020, a research team in Lund, Sweden, led by Can Kabadayi and Mathias Osvath, ran an experiment adapted from a classic test of future planning previously used with great apes. New Caledonian crows — a species already famous for crafting hooked tools from leaves — were taught that a specific token could be traded for food. The token itself was useless; only its future exchange value mattered. The crows were then shown the token alongside attractive but immediately useless objects, and later given a chance to trade it — after a delay, sometimes up to seventeen hours. Not only did the crows reliably select the token over the distractors, they did so at success rates that matched or exceeded those of bonobos and orangutans tested on the same paradigm. The crows were, in effect, saving up. They were resisting immediate temptation in favour of a future payoff they had to hold in mind. What made this particularly compelling was that the crows couldn't have learned this through prior experience — the situation was entirely novel. They were reasoning about an abstract future event, not following a conditioned reflex. Osvath noted that the crows seemed to approach the task 'strategically,' sometimes spending time inspecting the token before selecting it, as if confirming their plan. It was the kind of behaviour that, had a five-year-old child done it, nobody would have thought twice about. In a crow, it was revelatory.
Why It Matters
The crow research matters far beyond animal behaviour trivia. It challenges something we reach for instinctively: the idea that human cognition is categorically different from every other kind, rather than being one very elaborate point on a continuum. When scientists find that a bird — with a brain the size of a walnut and a radically different neural architecture — can plan ahead, delay gratification, and reason causally, it presses us to ask what intelligence actually is. Is it about neurons, or about the problems an environment forces a species to solve? Corvids live in complex social groups, remember thousands of food-cache locations, track who is watching them hide food and adjust their behaviour accordingly. The cognitive demands of their lives are extraordinary, and their brains rose to meet them. For how you move through the world: next time you observe animal behaviour that seems surprisingly 'clever,' resist the urge to explain it away as instinct or coincidence. The line between instinct and cognition is genuinely blurry — and sitting with that ambiguity turns out to be a more honest and more interesting position than the tidy hierarchy most of us inherited.
A Question to Ponder
If intelligence evolved independently in corvids and primates, what does that suggest about the kinds of problems — social, physical, temporal — that reliably produce it?
Get a new one of these every morning.
Start learning with Thinkable