Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41144671›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2025

Shared cognitive biases influence numerical judgments in macaques and crows.

Lena L Jannasch, Julia Grüb, Andreas Nieder

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 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. 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

3 authors.

Lena L JannaschAnimal Physiology Unit, Institute of Neurobiology, Department of Biology, University of Tübingen, Tübingen 72076, Germany.
Julia GrübAnimal Physiology Unit, Institute of Neurobiology, Department of Biology, University of Tübingen, Tübingen 72076, Germany.
Andreas NiederAnimal Physiology Unit, Institute of Neurobiology, Department of Biology, University of Tübingen, Tübingen 72076, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-6381-0375

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) NI 618/13-1 (FOR 5159)Studienstiftung des Deutschen Volkes (Studienstiftung) LJ
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cognitive biases, which come from the shortcuts our brains use to make decisions, often lead people to misjudge sizes, amounts, or other magnitudes. However, it is still unclear how these biases evolved. Nonhuman animals like primates and corvids share with humans a nonsymbolic number sense. Whether biases in magnitude estimation are evolutionarily widespread in animals remains an open question. We investigated numerical estimation in macaque monkeys and carrion crows-two distantly related but numerically proficient vertebrates-using a delayed match-to-numerosity task with dot arrays. Both species exhibited key biases commonly observed in humans during numerical estimation tasks: scalar variability (increasing response variability with numerosity), regression to the mean (overestimation of small and underestimation of large numerosities), and a sequential effect (estimates biased toward previous trial numerosities). Traditionally, these biases have been attributed either to static influences of overall task history or to dynamic effects from recent trials. Here, we demonstrate that a Bayesian model incorporating dynamic priors based on multiple previously encountered numerosities can account for all observed behavioral patterns. Our findings suggest that numerical judgments in both species are shaped by uncertainty and the integration of recent experience, revealing shared Bayesian-like mechanisms for cognitive biases across distantly related animals.

Indexed as

CognitionCrowsJudgmentMacacaAnimalsBayes TheoremFemaleMalecarrion crowcognitive biasevolutionnumberrhesus macaque

Identifiers

PMID41144671
PMCPMC12595436

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.