ArticleAnimal cognition2024
Perception of optical illusions in ungulates: insights from goats, sheep, guanacos and llamas.
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.
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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Optical illusions have long been used in behavioural studies to investigate the perceptual mechanisms underlying vision in animals. So far, three studies have focused on ungulates, providing evidence that they may be susceptible to some optical illusions, in a way similar to humans. Here, we used two food-choice tasks to study susceptibility to the Müller-Lyer and Delboeuf illusions in 17 captive individuals belonging to four ungulate species (Lama guanicoe, Lama glama, Ovis aries, Capra hircus). At the group level, there was a significant preference for the longer/larger food over the shorter/smaller one in control trials. Additionally, the whole group significantly preferred the food stick between two inward arrowheads over an identical one between two outward arrowheads in experimental trials of the Müller-Lyer task, and also preferred the food on the smaller circle over an identical one on the larger circle in the experimental trials of the Delboeuf task. Group-level analyses further showed no significant differences across species, although at the individual level we found significant variation in performance. Our findings suggest that, in line with our predictions, ungulates are overall susceptible to the Müller-Lyer and the Delboeuf illusions, and indicate that the perceptual mechanisms underlying size estimation in artiodactyls might be similar to those of other species, including humans.
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.