Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34267713›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2021

Goffin's Cockatoos (

Katarzyna Bobrowicz, Mark O'Hara, Chelsea Carminito, Alice M I Auersperg, Mathias Osvath

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Ratcheting up tool innovation in Goffin's cockatoos (Ethology : formerly Zeitschrift fur Tierpsychologie · 2023
    Article
  3. Review
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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Katarzyna BobrowiczDepartment of Psychology, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Mark O'HaraMesserli Research Institute, University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Chelsea CarminitoRoyal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
Alice M I AuerspergMesserli Research Institute, University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Mathias OsvathDepartment of Philosophy and Cognitive Science, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Lund University · SEUniversity of Veterinary Medicine Vienna · ATUniversity of Edinburgh · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Novel problems often partially overlap with familiar ones. Some features match the qualities of previous situations stored in long-term memory and therefore trigger their retrieval. Using relevant, while inhibiting irrelevant, memories to solve novel problems is a hallmark of behavioral flexibility in humans and has recently been demonstrated in great apes. This capacity has been proposed to promote technical innovativeness and thus warrants investigations of such a mechanism in other innovative species. Here, we show that proficient tool-users among Goffin's cockatoos-an innovative tool-using species-could use a relevant previous experience to solve a novel, partially overlapping problem, even despite a conflicting, potentially misleading, experience. This suggests that selecting relevant experiences over irrelevant experiences guides problem solving at least in some Goffin's cockatoos. Our result supports the hypothesis that flexible memory functions may promote technical innovations.

Indexed as

executive functionsflexibilityGoffin's cockatooinnovationmemorytool use

Identifiers

PMID34267713
PMCPMC8275924
OpenAlexW3174328487

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.