ArticleScientific reports2024
Body part categorical matching in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes).
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 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- On the (limited) use of touchscreen-based behavioural and cognitive research with dogs: potential causes and future directions.Animal cognition · 2026Pooled it
- Touchscreen Tasks for Cognitive Testing in Domestic Goats (Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Humans categorize body parts, reflecting our knowledge about bodies, and this could be useful in higher-level activities involving bodies. We tested whether humans' closest living relatives-chimpanzees-have the same ability using touchscreen tasks, focusing on the major parts: heads, torsos, arms, and legs. Six chimpanzees were trained to perform a body part matching-to-sample task using sets of pictures of chimpanzee bodies, where in each trial, the sample and choice pictures were the same. Five passed the training and received the test sessions, where three trial types were mixed: trained same-individual picture pairs; novel same-individual picture pairs; and novel different-individual picture pairs. All participants performed better than the chance level in all conditions and for all body parts. Further analyses showed differences in performance when the samples were different body parts. For example, the results revealed better performances for heads and torsos than arms and legs in "novel different-individual pairs". The study showed that chimpanzees can visually match and categorize body parts in this experiment setting, even across different chimpanzees' bodies, suggesting potential biological understanding. Different performances for body parts suggested a deviated categorization from humans. We hope this study will inspire future research on the evolution of body perception.
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.