ArticleFrontiers in psychology2018
Better, Not Just More-Contrast in Qualitative Aspects of Reward Facilitates Impulse Control in Pigs.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Performance of sheep and goats in a delay of gratification task.Animal cognition · 2026Article
- Pigs solve a cooperative task without showing a clear understanding of the need for a partner.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Animal affect, welfare and the Bayesian brain.Animal welfare (South Mimms, England) · 2024Review
- Representation of rewards differing in their hedonic valence in the caudate nucleus correlates with the performance in a problem-solving task in dogs (Canis familiaris).Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Horses wait for more and better rewards in a delay of gratification paradigm.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- The effect of age on discrimination learning and self-control in a marshmallow test for pigs.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Waiting for the better reward: Comparison of delay of gratification in young children across two cultures.PloS one · 2021Article
- Effects of early life and current housing on sensitivity to reward loss in a successive negative contrast test in pigs.Animal cognition · 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
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Delay-of-gratification paradigms, such as the famous "Marshmallow Test," are designed to investigate the complex cognitive concepts of self-control and impulse control in humans and animals. Such tests determine whether a subject will demonstrate impulse control by choosing a large, delayed reward over an immediate, but smaller reward. Documented relationships between impulsive behavior and aggression in humans and animals suggest important implications for farm animal husbandry and welfare, especially in terms of inadequate social behavior, tail biting and maternal behavior. In a preliminary study, we investigated whether the extent of impulse control would differ between quantitatively and qualitatively different aspects of reward in pigs. Twenty female piglets were randomly divided into two groups, with 10 piglets each. After a preference test to determine individual reward preference among six different food items, a discrimination test was conducted to train for successful discrimination between different amounts of reward (one piece vs. four pieces) and different qualitative aspects of reward (highly preferred vs. least preferred food item). Then, an increasing delay (2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 32 s) was introduced for the larger/highly preferred reward. Each piglet could choose to get the smaller/least preferred reward immediately or to wait for the larger/highly preferred reward. Piglets showed clear differences in their preference for food items. Moreover, the "quality group" displayed faster learning in the discrimination test (number of sessions until 90% of the animals completed the discrimination test: "quality group"-3 days vs. "quantity group"-5 days) and reached a higher level of impulse control in the delay-of-gratification test compared to the "quantity group" (maximum delay that was mastered: "quality group"-24 s vs. "quantity group"-8 s). These results demonstrate that impulse control is present in piglets but that the opportunity to get a highly preferred reward is more valued than the opportunity to get more of a given reward. This outcome also underlines the crucial role of motivation in cognitive test paradigms. Further investigations will examine whether impulse control is related to traits that are relevant to animal husbandry and welfare.
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.