Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36574158›Full record

ReviewAnimal cognition2023

Lessons learned in animal acoustic cognition through comparisons with humans.

Marisa Hoeschele, Bernhard Wagner, Dan C Mann

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 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Rhythm Across Species: Situating Human Speech in a Comparative Framework.Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
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

3 authors.

Marisa HoescheleAcoustics Research Institute, Austrian Academy of Sciences, Wohllebengasse 12-14, 1040, Vienna, Austria. marisa.hoeschele@oeaw.ac.at.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2102-0882
Bernhard WagnerAcoustics Research Institute, Austrian Academy of Sciences, Wohllebengasse 12-14, 1040, Vienna, Austria.
Dan C MannKonrad Lorenz Institute of Ethology, University of Veterinary Medicine, Vienna, Savoyenstrasse 1, 1160, Vienna, Austria.

Funding

H2020 European Research Council 101028815
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Humans are an interesting subject of study in comparative cognition. While humans have a lot of anecdotal and subjective knowledge about their own minds and behaviors, researchers tend not to study humans the way they study other species. Instead, comparisons between humans and other animals tend to be based on either assumptions about human behavior and cognition, or very different testing methods. Here we emphasize the importance of using insider knowledge about humans to form interesting research questions about animal cognition while simultaneously stepping back and treating humans like just another species as if one were an alien researcher. This perspective is extremely helpful to identify what aspects of cognitive processes may be interesting and relevant across the animal kingdom. Here we outline some examples of how this objective human-centric approach has helped us to move forward knowledge in several areas of animal acoustic cognition (rhythm, harmonicity, and vocal units). We describe how this approach works, what kind of benefits we obtain, and how it can be applied to other areas of animal cognition. While an objective human-centric approach is not useful when studying traits that do not occur in humans (e.g., magnetic spatial navigation), it can be extremely helpful when studying traits that are relevant to humans (e.g., communication). Overall, we hope to entice more people working in animal cognition to use a similar approach to maximize the benefits of being part of the animal kingdom while maintaining a detached and scientific perspective on the human species.

Indexed as

CognitionVocalization, AnimalAcousticsAnimalsCommunicationHumansAcousticsCommunicationComparative cognitionLanguageMusicVocalization

Identifiers

PMID36574158
PMCPMC9877085

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.