Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29968122›Full record

ArticleLearning & behavior2018

Revisiting the famous farm foxes: A psychological perspective.

Jonathan D Lane

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Learning & behavior, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 92% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jonathan D LaneVanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA. jonathan.lane@vanderbilt.edu.
Vanderbilt University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Five decades ago, Dmitry Belyaev, Lyudmila Trut, and colleagues began a now-famous experiment, selectively breeding foxes based on one criterion: perceived tame behavior. Over generations, the fox population changed in behavior (as predicted) but, intriguingly, also changed markedly in appearance-for example, many had wider mouths, curlier tails, different fur coloring, and floppy ears. These researchers concluded that the morphological changes that appeared in their foxes were a by-product of the researchers' selecting for genetic variants that are implicated both in behavior and in appearance. For decades, scientists have largely accepted this "shared genetic variants" interpretation to fully account for the co-occurrence of behavioral and morphological phenotypes in these foxes and in other domesticated animals. However, several decades of psychological research on human social cognition, human-canine interaction, and canine behavior strongly suggest that such an account may be incomplete. I forward a supplementary perspective, based on psychological research, that the covariation of appearance and behavior among these foxes may be partly an artifact of human psychological processes at play in selection. These processes include humans' tendency to infer individuals' traits based on their physical features; trait inferences, in turn, influence how humans treat those individuals. If accurate, this account bears on our understanding of these famous foxes, human-canine interactions, as well as humans' role in domestication.

Indexed as

BiasDomesticationPhenotypeResearch DesignSelective BreedingAnimalsBehavior, AnimalFoxesHumansCaninesDomesticationHumansSocial cognition

Identifiers

PMID29968122
OpenAlexW2811440497

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.