“Our results raise the possibility that spontaneous string pulling in New Caledonian crows may not be based on insight but on operant conditioning mediated by a perceptual-motor feedback cycle.”
This is from a behavioral study on the problem-solving abilities of crows. Sounds impressive, right? Do you have any idea what it means? I didn’t either, until I read science journalist Brandon Keim’s translation: “In other words, the crows relied on a simple trial-and-error approach.”
Now, that’s something I can get my head around. Why didn’t they just say that?
In an earlier post, I talked about the need for conservation groups to inspire people in order to increase support. The same thing applies to science in general. A lot of this type of research is funded by public money, so shouldn’t the scientists want the public to be interested in their results?
As an educator with a focus on nature and ecology, I want people to say “ooh, wow, fascinating!” when new information comes out about the natural world. Too often, studies like this come out that are more likely to result in people saying “ugh, science sure is dry and boring.” Come on, people – if something is interesting enough to do a study about, give us something afterwards to say “wow!” about.
I suppose it is good way to keep science journalists like Keim employed, so let’s hope that these research grants always come with funding for translation!