Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33025570›Full record

ArticleLearning & behavior2021

Response of male and female domestic chicks to change in the number (quantity) of imprinting objects.

Bastien S Lemaire, Rosa Rugani, Lucia Regolin, Giorgio Vallortigara

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Learning & behavior, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

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

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

Bastien S LemaireCenter for Mind/Brain Sciences, University of Trento, Piazza della Manifaturra 1, 38068, Rovereto, TN, Italy. bastien.lemaire@unitn.it.ORCID 0000-0003-0851-4084
Rosa RuganiDepartment of General Psychology, University of Padova, Padova, Italy.
Lucia RegolinDepartment of General Psychology, University of Padova, Padova, Italy.
Giorgio VallortigaraCenter for Mind/Brain Sciences, University of Trento, Piazza della Manifaturra 1, 38068, Rovereto, TN, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

When facing two sets of imprinting objects of different numerousness, domestic chicks prefer to approach the larger one. Given that choice for familiar and novel stimuli in imprinting situations is known to be affected by the sex of the animals, we investigated how male and female domestic chicks divide the time spent in the proximity of a familiar versus an unfamiliar number of objects, and how animals interact (by pecking) with these objects. We confirmed that chicks discriminate among the different numerousnesses, but we also showed that females and males behave differently, depending on the degree of familiarity of the objects. When objects in the testing sets were all familiar, females equally explored both sets and pecked at all objects individually. Males instead selectively approached the familiar numerousness and pecked more at it. When both testing sets comprised familiar as well as novel objects, both males and females approached the larger numerousness of familiar objects. However, chicks directed all their pecks toward the novel object within the set. Differences in the behavior of males and females can be accounted for in terms of sex difference in the motivation to reinstate social contact with the familiar objects and to explore novel ones, likely associated with the ecology and the social structure of the species before domestication.

Indexed as

ChickensRecognition, PsychologyAnimalsFemaleMaleDomestic chicksFilial imprintingNumerical discriminationSex differences

Identifiers

PMID33025570
PMCPMC7979580

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.