Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38558203›Full record

ArticleAnimal cognition2024

No evidence tube entrapment distresses rodents in typical empathy tests.

Dwi Atmoko Agung Nugroho, Sri Kusrohmaniah, Emma Pilz, Clare Krikorian, David Kearns, Burton Slotnick, Maria Gomez, Alan Silberberg

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Animal cognition, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors.

Dwi Atmoko Agung NugrohoAlumnus of Magister Psikologi, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia.
Sri KusrohmaniahFakultas Psikologi, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia.
Emma PilzDepartment of Psychology, American University, 4400 Massachusetts Ave., NW, Washington, DC, 20016, USA.
Clare KrikorianDepartment of Psychology, American University, 4400 Massachusetts Ave., NW, Washington, DC, 20016, USA.
David KearnsDepartment of Psychology, American University, 4400 Massachusetts Ave., NW, Washington, DC, 20016, USA.
Burton SlotnickDepartment of Psychology, American University, 4400 Massachusetts Ave., NW, Washington, DC, 20016, USA.
Maria GomezDepartment of Psychology, American University, 4400 Massachusetts Ave., NW, Washington, DC, 20016, USA.
Alan SilberbergDepartment of Psychology, American University, 4400 Massachusetts Ave., NW, Washington, DC, 20016, USA. asilber@american.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5495-9888

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the first two experiments an empty tube open at one end was placed in different locations. Male hamsters, tested one at a time, tended to stay close to the tube or in it. During the first minute of the first 4 sessions of Experiment 3, the hamster was unrestrained. If it entered the tube, it was locked within the tube. If it did not enter the tube during the first min, it was placed in it, and the tube was locked. Fifteen min later, the tube was opened, and the hamster was unrestrained for a further 20 min. The tube remained open during Session 5. Hamsters spent more time near the tube than predicted by chance and continued to enter the tube although tube-occupancy duration did not differ from chance levels. In Experiment 4, male rats were tested in two groups: rats in one group had been previously trapped in a tube and rats in the other group allowed to freely explore the test space. For the first two min of each of four 20-min sessions, trapped-group subjects were permitted to move about the chamber unless they entered the tube. In that case, they were locked in for the remainder of the session. If, after two min, they did not enter the tube, they were locked in it for the remaining 18 min. Free rats were unrestricted in all sessions. In Session 5, when both groups were permitted to move freely in the chamber, trapped and free rats spent more time in and near the tube than predicted by chance. These data show tube restraint does not seem to distress either hamsters or rats.

Indexed as

EmpathyRodentiaAnimalsHumansMaleRatsDistressProsocial behaviorPursuit of social contactRatRestraint tube

Identifiers

PMID38558203
PMCPMC10984888

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.