ArticleScientific reports2020
Poor numerical performance of guppies tested in a Skinner box.
Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Using an Automated Operant Conditioning Procedure to Test Colour Discrimination in Two Juvenile Piranhas,Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024Article
- GoFish: A low-cost, open-source platform for closed-loop behavioural experiments on fish.Behavior research methods · 2024Article
- The Sense of Number in Fish, with Particular Reference to Its Neurobiological Bases.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2021Review
- Automated Operant Conditioning Devices for Fish. Do They Work?Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2021Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We tested the hypothesis that part of the gap in numerical competence between fish and warm-blooded vertebrates might be related to the more efficient procedures (e.g. automated conditioning chambers) used to investigate the former and could be filled by adopting an adapted version of the Skinner box in fish. We trained guppies in a visual numerosity discrimination task, featuring two difficulty levels (3 vs. 5 and 3 vs. 4) and three conditions of congruency between numerical and non-numerical cues. Unexpectedly, guppies trained with the automated device showed a much worse performance compared to previous investigations employing more "ecological" procedures. Statistical analysis indicated that the guppies overall chose the correct stimulus more often than chance; however, their average accuracy did not exceed 60% correct responses. Learning measured as performance improvement over training was significant only for the stimuli with larger numerical difference. Additionally, the target numerosity was selected more often than chance level only for the set of stimuli in which area and number were fully congruent. Re-analysis of prior studies indicate that the gap between training with the Skinner box and with a naturalistic setting was present only for numerical discriminations, but not for colour and shape discriminations. We suggest that applying automated conditioning chambers to fish might increase cognitive load and therefore interfere with achievement of numerosity discriminations.
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.