ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2021
A Comparative Perspective on Three Primate Species' Responses to a Pictorial Emotional Stroop Task.
Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- On the (limited) use of touchscreen-based behavioural and cognitive research with dogs: potential causes and future directions.Animal cognition · 2026Pooled it
- Inhibitory control tests in non-human animals: validity, reliability, and perspectives.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2025Review
- Recognising depression in non-human primates: a narrative review of reported signs of depression.PeerJ · 2025Review
- Selective and prolonged attention to emotional scenes in humans and bonobos.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2024Article
- Metacognition in Japanese macaques (Macaca fuscata): does impulsivity explain unnecessary looks in the tubes task?Animal cognition · 2024Article
- Predator gaze captures both human and chimpanzee attention.PloS one · 2024Article
- Tolerant macaque species are less impulsive and reactive.Animal cognition · 2023Article
- No Evidence for Biased Attention Towards Emotional Scenes in Bornean Orangutans (Affective science · 2022Article
- Apex and ApeTouch: Development of a Portable Touchscreen System and Software for Primates at Zoos.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2022Article
- Testing for the "Blues": Using the Modified Emotional Stroop Task to Assess the Emotional Response of Gorillas.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2022Article
- Validation of a battery of inhibitory control tasks reveals a multifaceted structure in non-human primates.PeerJ · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The Stroop effect describes interference in cognitive processing due to competing cognitive demands. Presenting emotionally laden stimuli creates similar Stroop-like effects that result from participants' attention being drawn to distractor stimuli. Here, we adapted the methods of a pictorial Stroop study for use with chimpanzees (N = 6), gorillas (N = 7), and Japanese macaques (N = 6). We tested all subjects via touchscreens following the same protocol. Ten of the 19 subjects passed pre-test training. Subjects who reached criterion were then tested on a standard color-interference Stroop test, which revealed differential accuracy in the primates' responses across conditions. Next, to test for an emotional Stroop effect, we presented subjects with photographs that were either positively valenced (a preferred food) or negatively valenced (snakes). In the emotional Stroop task, as predicted, the primates were less accurate in trials which presented emotionally laden stimuli as compared to control trials, but there were differences in the apes' and monkeys' response patterns. Furthermore, for both Stroop tests, while we found that subjects' accuracy rates were reduced by test stimuli, in contrast to previous research, we found no difference across trial types in the subjects' response latencies across conditions.
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.