ArticleNature communications2020
Sensory substitution reveals a manipulation bias.
Article in Nature communications, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Real-Time Segmentation and Classification of Birdsong Syllables for Learning Experiments.eNeuro · 2026Article
- Estimating the motor exploration in reinforcement learning.iScience · 2026Article
- Sharp Waves, Bursts, and Coherence: Activity in a Songbird Vocal Circuit Is Influenced by Behavioral State.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025Article
- Visually-guided compensation of deafening-induced song deterioration.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Social context affects sequence modification learning in birdsong.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- User-Centered Design of Neuroprosthetics: Advancements and Limitations.CNS & neurological disorders drug targets · 2025Review
- Goal-directed vocal planning in a songbird.eLife · 2024Article
- Goal-directed and flexible modulation of syllable sequence within birdsong.Nature communications · 2024Article
- Article
- Sensory substitution reveals a manipulation bias.Nature communications · 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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sensory substitution is a promising therapeutic approach for replacing a missing or diseased sensory organ by translating inaccessible information into another sensory modality. However, many substitution systems are not well accepted by subjects. To explore the effect of sensory substitution on voluntary action repertoires and their associated affective valence, we study deaf songbirds to which we provide visual feedback as a substitute of auditory feedback. Surprisingly, deaf birds respond appetitively to song-contingent binary visual stimuli. They skillfully adapt their songs to increase the rate of visual stimuli, showing that auditory feedback is not required for making targeted changes to vocal repertoires. We find that visually instructed song learning is basal-ganglia dependent. Because hearing birds respond aversively to the same visual stimuli, sensory substitution reveals a preference for actions that elicit sensory feedback over actions that do not, suggesting that substitution systems should be designed to exploit the drive to manipulate.
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.