Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38989158›Full record

ArticleCurrent opinion in behavioral sciences2022

Wild cognition - linking form and function of cognitive abilities within a natural context.

Birgit Szabo, Anyelet Valencia-Aguilar, Isabel Damas-Moreira, Eva Ringler

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current opinion in behavioral sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. The evolutionary puzzle of cognition: challenges and insights from individual-based studies.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Too hot to reason? Experimental heatwaves affect cognitive traits in male guppies.Behavioral ecology : official journal of the International Society for Behavioral Ecology
    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

4 authors.

Birgit SzaboDivision of Behavioural Ecology, Institute of Ecology and Evolution, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Anyelet Valencia-AguilarDivision of Behavioural Ecology, Institute of Ecology and Evolution, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Isabel Damas-MoreiraBehavioural Ecology, Faculty of Biology, Bielefeld University, Bielefeld, Germany.
Eva RinglerDivision of Behavioural Ecology, Institute of Ecology and Evolution, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.

Funding

Austrian Science Fund FWF P 31518
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Interest in studying cognitive ecology has moved the field of animal cognition into the wild. Animals face many challenges such as finding food and other resources, avoiding and deterring predators and choosing the best mate to increase their reproductive success. To solve these dilemmas, animals need to rely on a range of cognitive abilities. Studying cognition in natural settings is a powerful approach revealing the link between adaptive form and biological function. Recent technological and analytical advances opened up completely new opportunities and research directions for studying animal cognition. Such innovative studies were able to disclose the variety in cognitive processes that animals use to survive and reproduce. Cognition indeed plays a major role in the daily lives of wild animals, in which the integration of many different types of information using a diverse range of cognitive processes enhances fitness.

Identifiers

PMID38989158
PMCPMC7616152

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.