Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36222937›Full record

ReviewAnimal cognition2023

Life is in motion (through a chick's eye).

Bastien S Lemaire, Giorgio Vallortigara

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Animal cognition, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing 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

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. 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

2 authors.

Bastien S LemaireCenter for Mind and Brain Sciences, University of Trento, Trento, Italy. bastien.lemaire@unitn.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0851-4084
Giorgio VallortigaraCenter for Mind and Brain Sciences, University of Trento, Trento, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8192-9062

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cognitive scientists, social psychologists, computer scientists, neuroscientists, ethologists and many others have all wondered how brains detect and interpret the motion of living organisms. It appears that specific cues, incorporated into our brains by natural selection, serve to signal the presence of living organisms. A simple geometric figure such as a triangle put in motion with specific kinematic rules can look alive, and it can even seem to have intentions and goals. In this article, we survey decades of parallel investigations on the motion cues that drive animacy perception-the sensation that something is alive-in non-human animals, especially in precocial species, such as the domestic chick, to identify inborn biological predispositions. At the same time, we highlight the relevance of these studies for an understanding of human typical and atypical cognitive development.

Indexed as

Motion PerceptionAnimalsBrainChickensCognitionCuesDomestic chicksHuman newbornsMotion perception; animacy; predispositions

Identifiers

PMID36222937
PMCPMC9877072

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.