Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38225380›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

Domestic pet dogs (Canis lupus familiaris) do not show a preference to contrafreeload, but are willing.

Liza Rothkoff, Lynna Feng, Sarah-Elizabeth Byosiere

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2024. 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. Review
  2. I'm Not Like the Others: Atypical Research Subjects in JEAB Publications.Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior · 2025
    Review
  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.

Liza RothkoffThinking Dog Center, Department of Psychology, Hunter College, City University of New York, New York, NY, 10065, USA. lgrothkoff@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0003-3194-3979
Lynna FengGuide Dogs for the Blind, San Rafael, CA, 94903, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0162-1496
Sarah-Elizabeth ByosiereThinking Dog Center, Department of Psychology, Hunter College, City University of New York, New York, NY, 10065, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3583-6778

Funding

City University of New York (CUNY) 66390-00 54CUNY | Hunter College 4/14/22
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Contrafreeloading is the behavior of working for food when also provided with identical food that does not require effort to obtain. This behavior has been observed in humans and non-human animals, including domesticated species. In the current investigation, we assessed whether companion animals, specifically domestic dogs, contrafreeload when presented with two feeders simultaneously, a snuffle mat (a work for food device) and a tray (a freely available food device). Thirty-eight pet dogs participated in the study in which ten feeding trials were presented where food was distributed equally in both feeders. Three overarching research questions were considered: (1) Do dogs prefer to contrafreeload and/or are they willing to contrafreeload, (2) is activity (step count) or body condition score (BCS) related to contrafreeloading behavior and, (3) does previous experience with puzzle feeders impact contrafreeloading behavior? Two general linear models were conducted assessing the effects of sex, experience, age, activity and BCS on the proportion of first choices to the snuffle mat (IC

Indexed as

WolvesAnimalsChoice BehaviorDogsFeeding BehaviorFoodLinear Models

Identifiers

PMID38225380
PMCPMC10789754

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.