Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30279481›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2018

Fast neural learning in dogs: A multimodal sensory fMRI study.

Ashley Prichard, Raveena Chhibber, Kate Athanassiades, Mark Spivak, Gregory S Berns

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
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

5 authors.

Ashley PrichardPsychology Department, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, 30322, USA.
Raveena ChhibberPsychology Department, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, 30322, USA.
Kate AthanassiadesPsychology Department, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, 30322, USA.
Mark SpivakComprehensive Pet Therapy, Atlanta, GA, 30328, USA.
Gregory S BernsPsychology Department, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, 30322, USA. gberns@emory.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dogs may follow their nose, but they learn associations to many types of sensory stimuli. Are some modalities learned better than others? We used awake fMRI in 19 dogs over a series of three experiments to measure reward-related learning of visual, olfactory, and verbal stimuli. Neurobiological learning curves were generated for individual dogs by measuring activation over time within three regions of interest: the caudate nucleus, amygdala, and parietotemporal cortex. The learning curves showed that dogs formed stimulus-reward associations in as little as 22 trials. Consistent with neuroimaging studies of associative learning, the caudate showed a main effect for reward-related stimuli, but not a significant interaction with modality. However, there were significant differences in the time courses, suggesting that although multiple modalities are represented in the caudate, the rates of acquisition and habituation are modality-dependent and are potentially gated by their salience in the amygdala. Visual and olfactory modalities resulted in the fastest learning, while verbal stimuli were least effective, suggesting that verbal commands may be the least efficient way to train dogs.

Indexed as

RewardAmygdalaAnimalsAssociation LearningCaudate NucleusCerebral CortexConditioning, ClassicalDogsFemaleMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleOlfactory PerceptionPattern Recognition, PhysiologicalPattern Recognition, VisualTime Factors

Identifiers

PMID30279481
PMCPMC6168449

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.