Dissertations, Theses, and Capstone Projects

Date of Degree

9-2024

Document Type

Dissertation

Degree Name

Ph.D.

Program

Psychology

Advisor

Joshua M. Plotnik

Committee Members

Diana Reiss

Sarah-Elizabeth Byosiere

Hannah S. Mumby

Subject Categories

Animal Studies | Comparative Psychology

Keywords

personality, innovation, neophilia, human-elephant conflict, flexibility, conservation

Abstract

An animal’s responses to a novel or changing environment are influenced by a number of behavioral traits and cognitive abilities associated with flexible decision making. Animals also exhibit strong consistency in some behavioral responses, described as personality traits, which may influence their ability to adjust to environmental changes. It is important to investigate both flexibility and consistency in behavior, as well as how these two characteristics interact with each other, to understand the range of individual variation in behavior and decision making within a species. This knowledge can also help us understand how some species and individuals within a species can adapt to rapid environmental changes in the Anthropocene. In this dissertation, I investigate how an indicator of flexibility (innovation) and personality traits describing responses to novelty vary in individual wild Asian elephants (Elephas maximus) living in and around Salakpra Wildlife Sanctuary in western Thailand. I tested innovation and reactions to novelty using field experiments both in the natural habitat of the protected sanctuary and along the border of the sanctuary near human-dominated landscapes, where agricultural development is prevalent. I installed puzzle boxes with multiple solutions inside the sanctuary and found that individual elephants varied widely in their abilities to innovate and open the doors of the puzzle box. In addition, their success was associated with persistence and exploratory diversity, with persistence being the most important predictor across different analysis levels (Chapter 1). When comparing innovation between those elephants tested inside the sanctuary in Chapter 1, to elephants tested with the same puzzle box near human-dominated landscapes, I found that innovation was not associated with the landscape elephants were tested in and individual variation was still significant. However, elephants tested near human-dominated landscapes were more likely to interact with the puzzle box in their first exposure and exhibited greater exploratory diversity in their interactions than elephants inside the sanctuary (Chapter 2). To test elephants’ responses to novelty and the consistency of responses across contexts, I recorded elephants’ initial attraction to and exploration of two types of novel objects installed inside the sanctuary and near human-dominated landscapes. Elephants tested near human-dominated landscapes were more neophilic and exploratory than elephants inside the sanctuary. The limited sample of elephants who were exposed to both types of novel objects did not demonstrate consistency in their responses, so we were not able to determine whether neophilia or exploration were personality traits in this population (Chapter 3). Together, these results demonstrate that variation in responses to novelty may be associated with elephants’ use of human-dominated landscapes, but elephants across both landscapes vary similarly in their ability to innovate. Therefore, in this population, we still do not know how flexibility relates to the elephants’ use of the landscape as other behaviors we have not yet studied may allow individuals to benefit from variable environments. These results can be applied to improve strategies for managing negative human and elephant interactions in the wild and have implications for understanding how flexibility and consistency in behavior interact in many species inhabiting human-dominated landscapes.

Download

This work is embargoed and will be available for download on Wednesday, September 30, 2026

Share

COinS