Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37018168›Full record

ArticlePloS one2023

Not bird-brained: Chickens use prior experience to solve novel timing problems.

Lisa Wiles, Sarah Cowie, Lewis Bizo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

3 authors.

Lisa WilesDepartment of Psychology, University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand.
Sarah CowieSchool of Psychology, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.ORCID 0000-0002-3667-0319
Lewis BizoFaculty of Business, Justice and Behavioural Sciences, Charles Sturt University, Bathurst, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-6030-6149

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite differences between bird and human brain anatomy, birds have recently demonstrated capacities thought to be uniquely human, including planning and problem-solving. Many avian demonstrations of 'complex' behaviors rely on species-specific behavior (e.g., caching, tool use), or use birds who have evolved largely in similarly undomesticated circumstances (e.g., pigeons). In the present experiment, we asked how a species domesticated thousands of years ago, chickens (Gallus gallus domesticus), used past experience to navigate novel problems in the double-bisection task. The double-bisection task which has been used extensively with pigeons, allowing a comparison of signatures of chicken and pigeon performance on the same task. Our findings revealed chickens, like pigeons, show flexible learning that is sensitive to the broader context in which events occur. Further, as with pigeons, our chickens' patterns of performance could be divided into two distinct categories which may reflect differences in the specific behaviors in which organisms engage during a timing task. Our findings demonstrate remarkable similarity in how chickens and pigeons use past experience to navigate novel problems. Further, these findings add to a growing body of knowledge suggesting the simplest forms of learning common across species-operant and respondent conditioning-are more flexible than is typically assumed.

Indexed as

ChickensColumbidaeAnimalsBrainConditioning, ClassicalHumans

Identifiers

PMID37018168
PMCPMC10075458

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.