ArticleThe Journal of experimental biology2023
Crows protect visual working memory against interference.
Article in The Journal of experimental biology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Working memory performance is tied to stimulus complexity.Communications biology · 2023Article
- Costs and benefits of voluntary attention in crows.Royal Society open science · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Working memory, the ability to actively maintain and manipulate information across time, is key to intelligent behavior. Because of the limited capacity of working memory, relevant information needs to be protected against distracting representations. Whether birds can resist distractors and safeguard memorized relevant information is unclear. We trained carrion crows in a delayed match-to-sample task to memorize an image while resisting other, interfering stimuli. We found that the repetition of the sample stimulus during the memory delay improved performance accuracy and accelerated reaction time relative to a reference condition with a neutral interfering stimulus. In contrast, the presentation of the image that constituted the subsequent non-match test stimulus mildly weakened performance. However, the crows' robust performance in this most demanding distractor condition indicates that sample information was actively protected from being overwritten by the distractor. These data show that crows can cognitively control and safeguard behaviorally relevant working memory contents.
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.