Pawsitively sad: pet-owners are more sensitive to negative emotion in animal distress vocalizations.

Christine E Parsons, Richard T LeBeau, Morten L Kringelbach, Katherine S Young

Open access · goldAbstract read

In one paragraph

Article in Royal Society open science, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

5citing papers in PubMed

1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

Evaluation of indicators of acute emotional states in dogs.Scientific reports · 2024
Article
Humans read emotional arousal in monkey vocalizations: evidence for evolutionary continuities in communication.PeerJ · 2022
Article
Polyphony of domestic dog whines and vocal cues to body size.Current zoology · 2021
Article
Pawsitively sad: pet-owners are more sensitive to negative emotion in animal distress vocalizations.Royal Society open science · 2019
Article
Minor second intervals: A shared signature for infant cries and sadness in music.i-Perception
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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Christine E ParsonsInteracting Minds Center, Department of Clinical Medicine, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0003-2856-6308

Richard T LeBeauDepartment of Psychology, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.

Morten L KringelbachDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Warneford Hospital, Oxford, UK.

Katherine S YoungDepartment of Psychology, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.

University of California, Los Angeles · USAarhus University · DKWarneford Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pets have numerous, effective methods to communicate with their human hosts. Perhaps most conspicuous of these are distress vocalizations: in cats, the 'miaow' and in dogs, the 'whine' or 'whimper'. We compared a sample of young adults who owned cats and or dogs ('pet-owners'

Indexed as

animal vocalizationscat miaowscryingdog whinesemotion perceptionpet-owners

Identifiers

PMID31598218

DOI10.1098/rsos.181555

PMCPMC6731714

OpenAlexW2969321170

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.