Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40526284›Full record

ReviewAnimal cognition2025

How cognitively demanding is the urban niche? Reconsidering exaptation and habituation.

Lily Johnson-Ulrich, Sofia Forss

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Animal cognition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Behavioral flexibility and its drivers in semi-urban vervet monkeys.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

2 authors.

Lily Johnson-Ulrich *Department of Evolutionary Biology and Environmental Studies, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland. l.johnsonulrich@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5604-5935
Sofia Forss *Department of Evolutionary Biology and Environmental Studies, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland. sofia.forss@ieu.uzh.ch.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6551-1907

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Urbanization is hypothesized to create a myriad of cognitive challenges for animals because it creates novel environmental conditions in evolutionary terms. The consensus is that these novel urban challenges act as drivers for increased cognitive abilities. However, scant empirical data validates the idea that urban environments are cognitively demanding relative to native ones. In this short communication we draw the attention to the fact that for some large-brained urban inhabitants the urban environment may instead provide "easy" exploitable niches, where these species can thrive because they already have the necessary cognitive tools in place. As such, evolutionary seen, such species are "exapted" to occupy a less challenging urban niche. As follows, while a species' cognition may facilitate its persistence under urbanization, it does not necessarily mean that urban populations face selective or developmental drivers for improved cognition in urban living. We further point out the potential bias anthropogenic habituation can bring about when intraspecific comparisons are made between urban and nonurban populations and suggest that researchers must focus on precisely which species-specific aspects of the environment are novel when making predictions about the consequences of urbanization on cognitive traits.

Indexed as

CognitionHabituation, PsychophysiologicUrbanizationAnimalsBiological EvolutionCitiesEcosystemHumansAnimal cognitionAnimal innovationAnimal urbanizationBehavioural flexibilityExaptationHuman habituationProblem-solving abilities

Identifiers

PMID40526284
PMCPMC12174247

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.