Flores

1
Allison Flores
Dr. Greg McClure
WR 39C
August 7, 2016
A Historical Review on Killer Whales Cognition
As Steven Pinker writes, a psychologist at Harvard University, and author of The Stuff of
Thought states, It would be perverse to deny consciousness to mammals (Kruger). In this
literature review about killer whales cognition, I will specifically be reviewing examples of
killer whales behaviors like vocal learning, vocal communication, self-recognition and the
ability of learning different imitations. This type of research began in the late 1900s, and I will
begin this review from more recent studies that were done in 2000, and ending with an article
that had just been conducted in 2012. I will begin talking about the vocal learning abilities of
killer whales, as well as two call types that are specifically made by killer whales. These call
types were determined by use of neural network based index. This showed how the whales were
able to learn the different mechanisms of call differentiation. In the article, Dialect change in
resident killer whales: implications for vocal learning and cultural transmission, shows how
killer whales learned the different mechanisms of call differentiation. I will then talk about how
killer whales showed self-recognition through the mirror-induced contingency checking test.
Later on in my review, I will be speaking about how certain calls that killer whales make have a
certain meaning. In this review, I will discuss animal cognition studies through examples of
behaviors like, vocal communication that have been studied on killer whales to show how they
illustrate cognitive abilities. In the concluding section, I will be identifying how killer whales
have the ability to learn imitative learning, which is another way showing that they do have

Flores
2
cognitive abilities and how these abilities are hindered for them because some of the whales are
held in captivity.
Donald R. Griffin and Gayle B. Speck, authors of the Animal Cognition Review: New
evidence of animal consciousness, show how most animals experience at least simple levels of
consciousness (Griffin and Speck 5). Natsoulas, a professor at the University of California
Davis, studies the meaning of consciousness. Natsoulas defines consciousness as, the state or
facility of being mentally conscious or aware of anything (Griffin and Speck 6). By following
this definition, Griffin, who was an American professor of zoology and did researcher in animal
behavior, animal navigation, acoustic orientation and sensory biophysics, and Speck who also
studies animal consciousness as well as writes about animal rights, show how animals are
conscious by studying three different methods. Griffin and Speck begin by looking for
correlations of consciousness at the brain level. Then they look at challenges that animals have
not been genetically programmed to be prepared for. Lastly, they look at animal communication.
For example, Griffin and Speck provide the example of how apes showed an increased ability to
use gestures or keyboard symbols to answer questions or to ask for things. Griffin and Speck also
show the example of how honey bees have shown gestural communication which helps them to
make important groups decisions. (Griffin and Speck 6). Griffin and Speck depict the different
methods that were used to show consciousness in animals through examples provided in their
article.
Following Griffin and Speck evidence, that animals do show cognition, V.B. Deecke, P.
Spong and John K.B Ford show through killer whales dialect that they do show the ability of
cognition. V.B. Deecke, a doctor in Evolutionary Biology, University St. Andrews, and a member
of the Marine Mammal Research Unit, studies the conservation of marine mammals from an

Flores
3
animal behavior background. Deecke is most interested in all aspects of sound production and
perception in animals. Researcher P. Spong is a member of the Orca Lab. John K.B. Ford, a
research scientist, and member of The Vancouver Aquarium Marine Science Centre and head of
the Cetacean Research program, studies the conservation status of marine mammals and turtles
off the coast. All three of these scientist are authors of the article, Dialect change in resident
killer whales: implications for vocal learning and cultural transmission, which was published in
the journal Animal Behaviour. In their review, published in 2000, these authors describe how
killer whales are able to learn by vocal dialects and how vocal dialects are not all the same. The
researchers, write about how killer whales produce many types of vocalizations like
echolocations clicks, tonal whistle, and pulsed calls. The way that the authors show how killer
whales learn vocal calls is by studying three different criterias. The first criteria were to find the
rate of structural change. For example, the authors state, If the structure of call types changes
with time, a sufficient measurement of auditory similarity comparing samples of calls from the
same group should give lower ratings of similarity the further the samples are apart (Deecke,
Ford, and Spong 630). This quote shows how the different call types have a specific meaning to
the killer whales. The second objective was to test for the divergence of call structure in two
groups. The third objective was to determine which structural factors are needed for neural
network discrimination (Deecke, Ford, and Spong 630). Once these parameters were
determined, if the calls are learned and structural modifications of the call types are sent between
the groups, structural parameters should show parallel trends in the calls (Deecke, Ford, and
Spong 631). The way all these objectives were carried out was by using hydrophones to listen to
underwater recordings. Two specific call types that were analyzed were N4 and N9 calls. From
the two types of calls that were received, it was determined that killer whales vocal dialects

Flores
4
change depending on the structure of the call. This shows that the rate of structural modification
is not the same for all call types. The vocal behavior of animals can change due to genetic
difference maturation effects of vocal learning (Deecke, Ford, and Spong 634 ). In this review, it
shows how killer whales dialects that have been learned, can change depending on the call type.
Another example of killer whales behavior that shows they have the ability of cognition,
is a study of killer whales behavior in front of a mirror. Their behavior in front of the mirror
showed how they have the cognitive abilities that are needed for self-recognition. This research
was done in 2001 in the article called, Mirror image processing in three marine mammal
species: killer whales, false killer whales, and California sea lions, written by scientist F.Delfour
and K. Marten. Through the mirror self-recognition model, it tested the existence of a cognitive
ability. It was testing to see if animals or individuals understand mirrored information. As animal
researcher Anderson writes, To recognize its own mirror image an in individual may need a
representation of itself; it may be aware of its own existence and process the ability to monitor its
own mental states: it may experience perceptual and reflective consciousness (Delfour and
Marten 1). From this quote it shows how the killer whales must show cognitive abilities because
they are capable of understanding the mirror test. Five killer whales were tested, three females
and two males. One of the whales dorsal fins was injured on the males, so the whale dropped out
of the study. This was conducted in the following way. Three times a day data was collected
using a JCV, Compact-VHSGR, and a -AX48S video camcorder. These equipments were by one
of the eight windows that was surrounding the main tank. One of the window was made into a
one-way mirror which the camcorder was placed. Whales were mark-tested on the males before
they were exposed to the mirror, where as the females were exposed to the mirror before they got
the mark test. A mark test is when the whole rostrum of the killer whales was rubbed with

Flores
5
antiseptic ointments (Delfour and Marten 3). What the results showed as in figure one shows, is
that when the whales were showed the mirror (window with the mirror) or the window (which is
the same window just without the mirror) they spent more time when they saw the mirror, where
as if they didnt see the mirror. Also, when the whales saw the mirror some would move their
head, open their mouth, show their tongue and play with the fish. As the authors write, The
killer whale responded to the mirror by displaying contingency checking behaviors (Delfour
and Marten 4). From this quote it is clear that the killer whales were capable of fully
understanding what was happening when they were looking at the mirror. In this review, it shows
how killer whales are able to recognize itself in front of a mirror showing self-consciousness.
Deecke and Ford have
another article published, but now
with scientist Peter J.B. Slater,
who conducts research at the
School of Biology, at the
University of St. Andrews, U.K.
Figure 1

This article which was published

Duration spent looking at the mirror and window
during 2005, in the journal Animal Behaviour, which shows how killer whales communicate
vocally with specific calls. This article focuses on two types of killer whales, transient and
resident. Resident killer whales feed on fish and do not have good hearing abilities while
transient killer whales hunt marine mammals which have good hearing abilities (Deecke, Ford
and Slater 2). As stated previously in this review by Deeck, Ford and Spong, this article says the
types of vocalizations that both killer whales have are echolocation clicks, whistles and pulsed
calls. As figure two shows, a picture of the three types of vocalizations. Clicks are used for

Flores
6
orientation and prey detection. Whistles are used in social context and short way of
communication. Pulsed calls are the most common among killer whales and it is used as way for
group recognition and coordinating behavior. It was determined that based on the type of
situation that the killer whales are in their sounds change, in order to avoid other mammals from
hurting them. In the article, it says that killer whales produced pulsed calls to determine costs
from eavesdropping on their prey (Deecke, Ford and Slater 1). To test how the calls change, an
offshore acoustic hydrophone was used. What the researches determined, was that the killer
whales are silent during all behavior except for after a kill. An example of the killer whales
behavior that was monitored, was called surface-active. This is when whales come into physical
contact with other killer whales at a
speed of 3 km/h. However, in this
review the authors suggest that the
killer whales in some situations should
use a different calls, in order to avoid
other mammals from interfering and
possible hurting them. This review
showed how vocal communication
changes depending on an animals
Figure 2

behavior. Specifically, their

Different types of vocalizations

communication is low when they are
searching for prey and it is high once an attack occurs.
Another way killer whales show that they have cognition is through their behavior of
imitative learning. In the article published in 2012, Experimental evidence for action imitation in

Flores
7
killer whales, published in the journal Animal Cognition, shows three ways in which killer
whales were capable of learning how to imitate. The article states, We used a do-as-other-does
paradigm in which 3 subjects witnessed a conspecific demonstrators performance that included
15 familiar and 4 novel behaviors (Abramson, Hernandez-Lloreda,Call and Colmenares 1).
This quote shows how the whales were able to imitate 18 different behaviors. For the whales to
be tested, one trainer was needed to indicate to the demonstrator and other trainer was needed to
give the commands to the killer whales. The three phases that the killer whales were tested on
was copying the command while responding to the gesture based command copy (Do that).
Phase 2 involved testing the subjects response to the trainers copy command. In phase 3 the
killer whales were tested with behaviors that the killer whales had never been exposed too. When
the killer whales performed a correct response, they were given fish and voice reinforcement
signals. What was shown from the killer whales, is since the very beginning they copied the
demonstrators gestures. Before the 8th trial all three subjects copied 100% of the demonstrators
behavior. The results also showed that the killer whales copied 100% of the untrained behaviors.
Overall, this review provided evidence that killer whales are capable of performing actions of
imitations.
In conclusion, killer whales show in their behavior that they cognitive abilities. As author
Simmonds writes, most intelligent animals (Simmonds 1). Through these four articles that I
presented in this review I have shown different killer whale behaviors, that reflects their
capability of cognition. One behavior is their excellent vocal communication, second is their
ability of learning to imitate other gestures and lastly the skill of understanding self-perception.
More recognition needs to be given to killer whales that they do show cognition and action
should be taken to help these whales escape from captivity.

Flores
8

Works Cited
Abramson, Jos Z., Victoria Hernndez-Lloreda, Josep Call, and Fernando Colmenares. "Experimental
Evidence for Action Imitation in Killer Whales (Orcinus Orca)." Animal Cognition Anim
Cogn16.1 (2012): 11-22. Web.
Deecke, V.b, J.k.b Ford, and P. Spong. "Dialect Change in Resident Killer Whales: Implications for
Vocal Learning and Cultural Transmission." Animal Behaviour 60.5 (2000): 629-38. Web.
Deecke, Volker B., John K.b. Ford, and Peter J.b. Slater. "The Vocal Behaviour of Mammal-eating
Killer Whales: Communicating with Costly Calls." Animal Behaviour 69.2 (2005): 395-405.
Web.

Flores
9

Delfour, F., and K. Marten. "Mirror Image Processing in Three Marine Mammal Species: Killer Whales
(Orcinus Orca), False Killer Whales (Pseudorca Crassidens) and California Sea Lions (Zalophus
Californianus)." Behavioural Processes 53.3 (2001): 181-90. Web.
Griffin, Donald R., and Gayle B. Speck. "New Evidence of Animal Consciousness." Animal
Cognition 7.1 (2004): 5-18. Web.
Kluger,Jeffrey. Intelligence. Time: The Animal Mind. 14 July. 2016:6-19. Print
Simmonds, Mark Peter. "Into the Brains of Whales." Applied Animal Behaviour Science 100.1-2
(2006): 103-16. Web.