ReviewPsychonomic bulletin & review2014
Reducing the neural search space for hominid cognition: what distinguishes human and great ape brains from those of small apes?
Review in Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ocular pigmentation in humans, great apes, and gibbons is not suggestive of communicative functions.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- A neuroanatomical predictor of mirror self-recognition in chimpanzees.Social cognitive and affective neuroscience · 2017Article
- Mirror self-recognition: a review and critique of attempts to promote and engineer self-recognition in primates.Primates; journal of primatology · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Differences in the psychological capacities of closely related species are likely due to differences in their brains. Here, we review neuroanatomical comparisons between hominids (i.e., great apes and humans) and their closest living relatives, the hylobatids (i.e., small apes). We report the differences in quantitative, as well as qualitative, neural characteristics on the basis of 19 comparative studies that each included representatives of all hominid genera and at least one genus of hylobatid. The current data are patchy, based on a small number of hylobatids and few neuroanatomical features. Yet a systematic interspecies comparison could help reduce the neuroanatomical search space for the neural correlates underlying psychological abilities restricted to hominids. We illustrate the potential power of this approach by discussing the neural features of visual self-recognition.
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.