Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34093146›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in behavioral neuroscience2021

Insect Consciousness.

Morten Overgaard

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 30% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Defending and refining the BirchAnimal welfare (South Mimms, England) · 2025
    Review
  3. Grinding as a slaughter method for farmed black soldier fly (Animal welfare (South Mimms, England) · 2024
    Article
  4. The self, its body and its brain.Scientific reports · 2023
    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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Morten OvergaardAarhus Institute of Advanced Studies, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.
Aarhus University · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The question of consciousness in other species, not least species very physically different from humans such as insects, is highly challenging for a number of reasons. One reason is that we do not have any available empirical method to answer the question. Another reason is that current theories of consciousness disagree about the relation between physical structure and consciousness, i.e., whether consciousness requires specific, say, neural structures or whether consciousness can be realized in different ways. This article sets out to analyze if and how there could be an empirical and/or a theoretical approach to the topic on the basis of current consciousness research in humans.

Indexed as

consciousnessinsectsmeasures of consciousnessmethodologysubjective experiencetheories of consciousness

Identifiers

PMID34093146
PMCPMC8175961
OpenAlexW4205670377

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.