Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41217805›Full record

ArticleeLife2025

Individual recognition in a jumping spider (

Christoph D Dahl, Yaling Cheng

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in eLife, 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. Complexity and Target Preservation in Category Maps.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
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.

Christoph D DahlInstitute of Biology, University of Neuchâtel, Neuchâtel, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4296-1526
Yaling ChengGraduate Institute of Mind, Brain and Consciousness, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0002-5198-5797

Funding

National Science and Technology Council 110-2311-B-038-002National Science and Technology Council 112-2410-H-038-027Swiss National Science Foundation PZ00P3_154741Taipei Medical University TMU108-AE1-B33
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Individual recognition is conceptually complex and computationally intense, leading to the general assumption that this social knowledge is solely present in vertebrates with larger brains, while miniature-brained animals in differentiating societies eschew the evolutionary pressure for individual recognition by evolving computationally less demanding class-level recognition, such as kin, social rank, or mate recognition. Arguably, this social knowledge is restricted to species with a degree of sociality (sensu Wilson, 2000, for a review Gherardi et al., 2012). Here, we show the exception to this rule in a non-social arthropod species, the jumping spider

Indexed as

Behavior, AnimalRecognition, PsychologySpidersAnimalsHabituation, PsychophysiologicSocial Behaviorecologyflexible learningindividual recognitionjumping spiderlong-term memoryneurosciencePhidippus regiusrecognition memory

Identifiers

PMID41217805
PMCPMC12604854

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.