Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34703619›Full record

ArticleRoyal Society open science2021

Performance of goats in a detour and a problem-solving test following long-term cognitive test exposure.

K Rosenberger, M Simmler, J Langbein, N Keil, C Nawroth

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Royal Society open science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Humans and Goats: Improving Knowledge for a Better Relationship.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2022
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Goats (Frontiers in psychology · 2021
    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

5 authors.

K RosenbergerSwiss Federal Veterinary Office, Centre for Proper Housing of Ruminants and Pigs, Agroscope, 8355 Ettenhausen, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0003-4053-187X
M SimmlerDigital Production Group, Agroscope, 8355 Ettenhausen, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-4095-4111
J LangbeinResearch Institute for Farm Animal Biology, Institute of Behavioural Physiology, 18196 Dummerstorf, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-1170-5431
N KeilSwiss Federal Veterinary Office, Centre for Proper Housing of Ruminants and Pigs, Agroscope, 8355 Ettenhausen, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-3663-7682
C NawrothResearch Institute for Farm Animal Biology, Institute of Behavioural Physiology, 18196 Dummerstorf, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-4582-4057

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cognitive research in long-lived species commonly involves using the same animals in different experiments. It is unclear whether the participation in cognitive tests can notably alter the performance of individuals in subsequent conceptually different tests. We therefore investigated whether exposure to cognitive tests affects future test performance of goats. We used three treatment groups: goats with long-term exposure to human-presented object-choice tests (for visual discrimination and reversal learning tests + cognitive test battery), goats that were isolated as for the test exposure but received a reward from the experimenter without being administered the object-choice tests, and goats that were isolated but neither received a reward nor were administered the tests. All treatment groups were subsequently tested in two conceptually different cognitive tests, namely a spatial A-not-B detour test and an instrumental problem-solving test. We tested dairy goats, selected for high productivity, and dwarf goats, not selected for production traits, each at the same two research sites. We did not find notable differences between treatments with respect to the goats' detour or problem-solving performance. However, high variation was observed between the research sites, the selection lines, and among individuals, highlighting potential pitfalls of making accurate comparisons of cognitive test performances.

Indexed as

animal cognitionreplicabilityresearch siteselection linespatial cognition

Identifiers

PMID34703619
PMCPMC8527204

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.