ArticleJournal of comparative psychology (Washington, D.C. : 1983)2025
Monkeys (Macaca mulatta) rank lists using multiple cognitive mechanisms simultaneously.
Article in Journal of comparative psychology (Washington, D.C. : 1983), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Planning in Nonhuman Primates Emerges from Structure Knowledge and is Distinct from Attention, Working Memory, Effort Control, and Learning.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
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
Memorizing the relations between items and learning relational rules are two ways in which sets of items can be ranked. We investigated the interaction of these types of learning in a series of five experiments with six adult male rhesus monkeys. We presented monkeys with three types of image sets. Scene sets were random images of natural scenes or cityscapes with no perceptually evident pattern by which to rank them. Relations among these images had to be learned through trial and error. Patterned sets were shapes that varied systematically along a physical dimension such as size such that a single rule for ranking them could be applied across images. Disordered sets were the same as Patterned sets, but monkeys were trained to rank them in an arbitrary order that was not consistent with differences along a physical dimension. Monkeys learned Scene sets more quickly than Patterned sets and Disordered sets, suggesting that monkeys memorize the relations between images relatively easily. In follow-up experiments, we found that monkeys also learned rules for the Patterned sets, indicated by the fact that they generalized performance to novel images and reversed ranks across the whole set after training with a single reversed pair. In Experiments 4 and 5, we investigated the interaction of memorization and relational rule learning with compound image sets that included both systematic physical variation and arbitrary visual content. We found further evidence that monkeys ordered images by both memorization and rules. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).
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.