Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39060867›Full record

ArticleLearning & behavior2025

There's "magic" in comparative cognition.

Michael J Beran

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Learning & behavior, 2025. 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

1 author.

Michael J BeranDepartment of Psychology and Language Research Center, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA, USA. mberan1@gsu.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Among the many important empirical and theoretical contributions in her career Clayton and her colleagues advanced the idea that comparative cognition researchers would benefit from considering the role of magic and the techniques of the magician in some areas of cross-species cognitive study. They provided compelling and exciting studies using the techniques of the magician and demonstrated how those affect nonhuman animals that rely on vision, showing that there are similarities and dissimilarities in how susceptible some nonhuman species are to the magician's effects that typically work so well on human observers.

Indexed as

CognitionPsychology, ComparativeAnimalsHumansComparative cognitionIllusionMagicPerception

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.