Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40438544›Full record

ArticleRoyal Society open science2025

Parrot politics: social decision-making in wild parrots relies on both individual recognition and intrinsic markers.

Julia Penndorf, Damien R Farine, John M Martin, Lucy M Aplin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Royal Society open science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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.

Julia PenndorfMax Planck Institute of Animal Behavior, Radolfzell, Baden-Württemberg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9730-673X
Damien R FarineDivision of Ecology and Evolution, Research School of Biology, Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2208-7613
John M MartinWestern Sydney University Hawkesbury Institute for the Environment, Penrith, New South Wales, Australia.
Lucy M AplinMax Planck Institute of Animal Behavior, Radolfzell, Baden-Württemberg, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dominance hierarchies are generally thought to form over time via memory of repeated interactions. Yet dominance hierarchies are also occasionally reported in species with fission-fusion social dynamics, where individuals may encounter large numbers of individuals, leading to incomplete social information. In these cases, three potential mechanisms have been proposed. First, the complex decision-making required could increase selection for social cognition. Second, so-called 'badge-of-status' could evolve as shortcuts. Third, mixed strategies could evolve that rely on memory for interactions with familiars and status signals for strangers. Here, we test these hypotheses in wild sulphur-crested cockatoos (

Indexed as

aggressive interactionsfission–fusion dynamicsPsittaciformessocial cognitionsocial heuristicssocial hierarchies

Identifiers

PMID40438544
PMCPMC12115798

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.