ArticleAnimal cognition2023
When deciding to cooperate by direct reciprocity, Norway rats sometimes benefit from olfactory competence and seem not impaired by insufficient cognitive abilities.
Article in Animal cognition, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Direct reciprocity requires the ability to recognize and memorize social partners, and to remember their previous actions. 'Insufficient cognitive abilities' have been assumed to potentially impair the ability to cooperate by direct reciprocity. Here we compare the propensity of rats to use direct reciprocity with their ability to memorize and recognize sensory cues in a non-social task. Female rats enriched in one of three sensory modalities (visual, olfactory or auditory) performed better in a learning task when they were tested with the specific sensory modality in which they have been enriched. For the cooperation test, during three subsequent reciprocity experiments the rats could provide two partners differing in their previous helpfulness with food. Individuals performing better in the non-social learning task that involved olfactory cues applied direct reciprocity more successfully in one experiment. However, in the experiment preventing visual cues and physical contact, rats applied direct reciprocity rules irrespective of their performance in the learning task with olfactory cues. This indicates that an enhanced olfactory recognition ability, despite being beneficial, is not a prerequisite for the rats' ability to cooperate by direct reciprocity. This might suggest that when rats have all types of information about their social partner, individuals may apply other criteria than the reciprocity decision rule when determining how much help to provide, as for instance coercion. Interestingly, when all individuals are constrained to mostly rely on olfactory memory, individuals apply direct reciprocity independently of their ability to memorize olfactory cues in a non-social context. 'Insufficient cognitive abilities' may thus not be the true reason when direct reciprocity is not observed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
36869235What 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.