ArticleJournal of comparative physiology. A, Neuroethology, sensory, neural, and behavioral physiology2018
Size discrimination in barn owls as compared to humans.
Article in Journal of comparative physiology. A, Neuroethology, sensory, neural, and behavioral physiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- New genome assembly of the barn owl (Ecology and evolution · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We tested how well barn owls can discriminate objects of different sizes. This ability may be important for the owls when catching prey. We performed a quantitative experiment in the laboratory and trained owls in a task in which the owls had to discriminate whether two rhombi presented simultaneously on a computer monitor were of the same or of different sizes. We obtained full data sets with two experienced owls and one data point with a third owl. For objects being sufficiently larger than the spatial resolution of the barn owl, the angular threshold was related to object size, implying that the discrimination followed Weber's law. The range of Weber fractions we determined was between 0.026 and 0.09. For object sizes close to the spatial resolution, performance degraded. We conducted similar experiments with human subjects. Human thresholds showed the same dependence on object size, albeit down to smaller object sizes. Human performance resulted in a range of Weber fractions extending from 0.025 to 0.036. The differences between owls and humans could be explained by the much higher spatial acuity of humans compared with owls.
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.