ArticleAnimal cognition2023
Performance on inhibitory tasks does not relate to handedness in several small groups of Callitrichids.
Article in Animal cognition, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Inhibitory control tests in non-human animals: validity, reliability, and perspectives.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Brain lateralization, a trait ubiquitous in vertebrates and invertebrates, refers to structural differences between the left and right sides of the brain or to the left and right sides controlling different functions or processing information in different ways. Many studies have looked into the advantages of lateralized brains and discovered that cerebral lateralization confers a fitness advantage. Enhancing cognitive ability has been proposed as one of the potential benefits of the lateralized brain, however, this has not been widely validated. In this study, we investigated the handedness of 34 subjects from four groups of Callitrichids, as well as their performance in two inhibitory control tasks (the revised A-not-B task and the cylinder task). The subjects had strong individual hand preferences, and only a few zoo-born individuals were ambidextrous. Sex and generation influence the strength of hand preference. In the cylinder task, the subjects showed differences between groups, and the performance of the second-generation was better than that of the first-generation. We found that neither the strength of hand preferences (ABS-HI) or direction of hand preferences (HI) was linked with success on the two inhibitory tasks. That is, we were unable to support the enhanced cognitive function hypothesis. We believe that individual ontogeny and the type of cognitive task have an impact on the support of this hypothesis. The advantages of lateralized brain may be reflected in tests that require multiple cognitive abilities.
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.