Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36222936›Full record

ArticleAnimal cognition2023

Repeated testing does not confound cognitive performance in the Western Australian magpie (Cracticus tibicen dorsalis).

Joseph G Sollis, Benjamin J Ashton, Elizabeth M Speechley, Amanda R Ridley

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

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 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Inhibitory control tests in non-human animals: validity, reliability, and perspectives.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Long-term repeatability of cognitive performance.Royal Society open science · 2022
    Article
  11. Response to intruder number is related to spontaneous quantity discrimination performance in a wild bird.Behavioral ecology : official journal of the International Society for Behavioral Ecology
    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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Joseph G SollisCentre for Evolutionary Biology, School of Biological Sciences, University of Western Australia, Perth, WA, Australia. joseph.sollis@gmail.com.
Benjamin J AshtonCentre for Evolutionary Biology, School of Biological Sciences, University of Western Australia, Perth, WA, Australia.
Elizabeth M SpeechleyCentre for Evolutionary Biology, School of Biological Sciences, University of Western Australia, Perth, WA, Australia.
Amanda R RidleyCentre for Evolutionary Biology, School of Biological Sciences, University of Western Australia, Perth, WA, Australia.
University of Western Australia · AUMacquarie University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A robust understanding of cognitive variation at the individual level is essential to understand selection for and against cognitive traits. Studies of animal cognition often assume that within-individual performance is highly consistent. When repeated tests of individuals have been conducted, the effects of test order (the overall sequence in which different tests are conducted) and test number (the ordinal number indicating when a specific test falls within a sequence)-in particular the potential for individual performance to improve with repeated testing-have received limited attention. In our study, we investigated test order and test number effects on individual performance in three inhibitory control tests in Western Australian magpies (Cracticus tibicen dorsalis). We presented adult magpies with three novel inhibitory control tasks (detour-reaching apparatuses) in random order to test whether experience of cognitive testing and the order in which the apparatuses were presented were predictors of cognitive performance. We found that neither test number nor test order had an effect on cognitive performance of individual magpies when presenting different variants of inhibitory control tasks. This suggests that repeated testing of the same cognitive trait, using causally identical but visually distinct cognitive tasks, does not confound cognitive performance. We recommend that repeated testing effects of cognitive performance in other species be studied to broadly determine the validity of repeated testing in animal cognition studies.

Indexed as

PasseriformesAnimalsAustraliaCognitionCognitionConsistencyDetour reachingInhibitory controlMagpieRepeated testing

Identifiers

PMID36222936
OpenAlexW4304756714

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.