ArticlePloS one2011
Sounds scary? Lack of habituation following the presentation of novel sounds.
Article in PloS one, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluating Aversion to Eye-Like Stimuli as a Foraging Deterrent in Urban European Herring Gulls.Ecology and evolution · 2026Article
- Leveraging artificial intelligence in bioacoustics for animal health monitoring and early diagnosis in veterinary medicine.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2026Review
- Experimental Exposure to Noise Affects Hunting Behavior Already From a Young Age in a Nocturnal Acoustic Predator.Ecology and evolution · 2025Article
- Effects of a veterinary functional music-based enrichment program on the psychophysiological responses of farm pigs.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Three sympatric host nestlings eavesdrop on cuckoo nestling distress calls.Ecology and evolution · 2024Article
- Chicken's best friend? Livestock guardian dog bonding with free-ranging chickens.Translational animal science · 2023Article
- Inducing fear using acoustic stimuli-A behavioral experiment on moose (Ecology and evolution · 2022Article
- Punishment and its putative fallout: A reappraisal.Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior · 2021Article
- Spontaneous Mouse Behavior in Presence of Dissonance and Acoustic Roughness.Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience · 2020Article
- Out of sight of wind turbines-Reindeer response to wind farms in operation.Ecology and evolution · 2018Article
- Reindeer habitat use in relation to two small wind farms, during preconstruction, construction, and operation.Ecology and evolution · 2017Article
- The sound of danger: threat sensitivity to predator vocalizations, alarm calls, and novelty in gulls.PloS one · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAnimals typically show less habituation to biologically meaningful sounds than to novel signals. We might therefore expect that acoustic deterrents should be based on natural sounds. METHODOLOGY: We investigated responses by western grey kangaroos (Macropus fulignosus) towards playback of natural sounds (alarm foot stomps and Australian raven (Corvus coronoides) calls) and artificial sounds (faux snake hiss and bull whip crack). We then increased rate of presentation to examine whether animals would habituate. Finally, we varied frequency of playback to investigate optimal rates of delivery. PRINCIPAL
findingsNine behaviors clustered into five Principal Components. PC factors 1 and 2 (animals alert or looking, or hopping and moving out of area) accounted for 36% of variance. PC factor 3 (eating cessation, taking flight, movement out of area) accounted for 13% of variance. Factors 4 and 5 (relaxing, grooming and walking; 12 and 11% of variation, respectively) discontinued upon playback. The whip crack was most evocative; eating was reduced from 75% of time spent prior to playback to 6% following playback (post alarm stomp: 32%, raven call: 49%, hiss: 75%). Additionally, 24% of individuals took flight and moved out of area (50 m radius) in response to the whip crack (foot stomp: 0%, raven call: 8% and 4%, hiss: 6%). Increasing rate of presentation (12x/min ×2 min) caused 71% of animals to move out of the area. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: The bull whip crack, an artificial sound, was as effective as the alarm stomp at eliciting aversive behaviors. Kangaroos did not fully habituate despite hearing the signal up to 20x/min. Highest rates of playback did not elicit the greatest responses, suggesting that 'more is not always better'. Ultimately, by utilizing both artificial and biological sounds, predictability may be masked or offset, so that habituation is delayed and more effective deterrents may be produced.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.