ArticleAnimal cognition2023
Context-effect bias in capuchin monkeys (Sapajus spp.): exploring decoy influences in a value-based food choice task.
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 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Neuronal Activity in Orbitofrontal Cortex during Trinary Choices under Risk.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2026Article
- Neuronal Activity in Orbitofrontal Cortex during Trinary Choices under Risk.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Factors Modulating the Occurrence of the Selective-Value Effect in Tufted Capuchin Monkeys (Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Article
- Available and unavailable decoys in capuchin monkeys (Sapajus spp.) decision-making.Animal cognition · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Decision making is known to be liable to several context effects. In particular, adding a seemingly irrelevant alternative (decoy) to a set of options can modify preferences: typically, by increasing choices towards whatever option clearly dominates the decoy (attraction effect), but occasionally also decreasing its appeal and generating a shift in the opposite direction (repulsion effect). Both types of decoy effects violate rational choice theory axioms and suggest dynamic processes of preference-formation, in which the value of each alternative is not determined a priori, but it is instead constructed by comparing options during the decision process. These effects are well documented, both in humans and in other species: e.g., amoebas, ants, honeybees, frogs, birds, cats, dogs. However, evidence of decoy effects in non-human primates remains surprisingly mixed. This study investigates decoy effects in capuchin monkeys (Sapajus spp.), manipulating time pressure across different conditions, to test whether such effects require time-consuming comparative processes among available alternatives. Whereas the time-dependent nature of decoy effects is a robust finding in the human literature, this is its first investigation in non-human animals. Our results show that capuchins exhibit an attraction effect with decoys targeting their preferred food, and that this effect disappears under time pressure; moreover, we observe preliminary evidence of a repulsion effect when decoys target instead the less-preferred food, possibly due to the larger distance between decoy and target in the attribute space. Taken together, these results provide valuable insight on the evolutionary roots of comparative decision making.
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.