ReviewAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2021
The Challenge of Illusory Perception of Animals: The Impact of Methodological Variability in Cross-Species Investigation.
Review 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 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Response to geometrical visual illusions in non-human animals: a meta-analysis.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2024Pooled it
- Rewarding animals based on their subjective percepts is enabled by online Bayesian estimation of perceptual biases.PLoS biology · 2025Article
- Circles of deception: the Ebbinghaus illusion from fish to birds.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Monkeys overestimate connected arrays in a relative quantity task: A reverse connectedness illusion.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2024Article
- Through an animal's eye: the implications of diverse sensory systems in scientific experimentation.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2024Review
- Perception of optical illusions in ungulates: insights from goats, sheep, guanacos and llamas.Animal cognition · 2024Article
- Behavioural Methods to Study Cognitive Capacities of Animals.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023Article
- The BTPI: An online battery for measuring susceptibility to visual illusions.Journal of vision · 2023Article
- The influence of visual illusion perception on numerosity estimation could be evolutionarily conserved: exploring the numerical Delboeuf illusion in humans (Homo sapiens) and fish (Poecilia reticulata).Animal cognition · 2023Article
- Consistently Inconsistent Perceptual Illusions in Nonhuman Primates: The Importance of Individual Differences.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2022Review
- Seeing Things: A Community Science Investigation into Motion Illusion Susceptibility in Domestic Cats (Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2022Article
- Guppies (Biology letters · 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Although we live on the same planet, there are countless different ways of seeing the surroundings that reflect the different individual experiences and selective pressures. In recent decades, visual illusions have been used in behavioural research to compare the perception between different vertebrate species. The studies conducted so far have provided contradictory results, suggesting that the underlying perceptual mechanisms may differ across species. Besides the differentiation of the perceptual mechanisms, another explanation could be taken into account. Indeed, the different studies often used different methodologies that could have potentially introduced confounding factors. In fact, the possibility exists that the illusory perception is influenced by the different methodologies and the test design. Almost every study of this research field has been conducted in laboratories adopting two different methodological approaches: a spontaneous choice test or a training procedure. In the spontaneous choice test, a subject is presented with biologically relevant stimuli in an illusory context, whereas, in the training procedure, a subject has to undergo an extensive training during which neutral stimuli are associated with a biologically relevant reward. Here, we review the literature on this topic, highlighting both the relevance and the potential weaknesses of the different methodological approaches.
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.