Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41193881›Full record

ReviewAnimal cognition2025

Compositionality in human and animal communication.

Nathan Klinedinst

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. 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.

Nathan KlinedinstPsychology & Language Sciences, University College London, London, UK. nathank@ucl.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0880-2919

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Human languages use complex, structured signals whose meanings are compositional. Recent empirical research has claimed to demonstrate compositionality in bird and primate communication (Berthet et al. 2025; Engesser et al. 2016; Girard-Buttoz et al. 2025; Leroux et al. 2023; Suzuki et al. 2017). While the compositionality of human languages seems beyond doubt, it can be demonstrated powerfully and immediately because of several other important features of language. Clarifying the arguments for compositionality in human languages reveals open questions and alternative hypotheses about the evidence from other species, and directions for further research and possible limitations.

Indexed as

Animal CommunicationCommunicationLanguageAnimalsHumansAnimal communicationAnimal linguisticsCompositionalityEvolution of lanugagePragmaticsSemanticsSyntax

Identifiers

PMID41193881
PMCPMC12589309

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.