ReviewInterface focus2017
The evolution of intelligence in mammalian carnivores.
Review in Interface focus, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 53 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Quick on their paws: mice living in human-disturbed areas are faster problem-solvers than mice in strictly protected areas.Animal cognition · 2025Article
- Wild canids and felids differ in their reliance on reused travel routeways.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
- Large and expensive brain comes with a short lifespan: The relationship between brain size and longevity among fish taxa.Journal of fish biology · 2022Article
- Animal Creativity as a Function of Behavioral Innovation and Behavior Flexibility in Problem-solving Situations.Integrative psychological & behavioral science · 2022Article
- The value of individual identification in studies of free-living hyenas and aardwolves.Mammalian biology = Zeitschrift fur Saugetierkunde · 2022Review
- Variation in reversal learning by three generalist mesocarnivores.Animal cognition · 2021Article
- Testing hypotheses of marsupial brain size variation using phylogenetic multiple imputations and a Bayesian comparative framework.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2021Article
- Why big brains? A comparison of models for both primate and carnivore brain size evolution.PloS one · 2021Article
- Validity of Cognitive Tests for Non-human Animals: Pitfalls and Prospects.Frontiers in psychology · 2020Review
- An evolutionary perspective on paranoia.Nature human behaviour · 2019Article
- The Cultural Brain Hypothesis: How culture drives brain expansion, sociality, and life history.PLoS computational biology · 2018Article
- Individual differences: Case studies of rodent and primate intelligence.Journal of experimental psychology. Animal learning and cognition · 2017Review
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Although intelligence should theoretically evolve to help animals solve specific types of problems posed by the environment, it is unclear which environmental challenges favour enhanced cognition, or how general intelligence evolves along with domain-specific cognitive abilities. The social intelligence hypothesis posits that big brains and great intelligence have evolved to cope with the labile behaviour of group mates. We have exploited the remarkable convergence in social complexity between cercopithecine primates and spotted hyaenas to test predictions of the social intelligence hypothesis in regard to both cognition and brain size. Behavioural data indicate that there has been considerable convergence between primates and hyaenas with respect to their social cognitive abilities. Moreover, compared with other hyaena species, spotted hyaenas have larger brains and expanded frontal cortex, as predicted by the social intelligence hypothesis. However, broader comparative study suggests that domain-general intelligence in carnivores probably did not evolve in response to selection pressures imposed specifically in the social domain. The cognitive buffer hypothesis, which suggests that general intelligence evolves to help animals cope with novel or changing environments, appears to offer a more robust explanation for general intelligence in carnivores than any hypothesis invoking selection pressures imposed strictly by sociality or foraging demands.
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.