Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41255127›Full record

ArticleBiology letters2025

Beyond criterion: cognitive flexibility in wild striated caracaras.

Katie J Harrington, Megan L Lambert

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biology letters, 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

2 authors.

Katie J HarringtonMesserli Research Institute, Department of Interdisciplinary Life Sciences, University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-3974-1020
Megan L LambertMesserli Research Institute, Department of Interdisciplinary Life Sciences, University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0003-3618-7260

Funding

Austrian Science Fund 10.55776/P34533Shackleton Scholarship Fund
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cognitive flexibility, the capacity to adapt to changing conditions, is often assessed with reversal learning, in which a learned association must be updated after reward contingencies change. Trials-to-criterion (TTC) is a widely applied learning threshold, but it can misrepresent performance; some individuals improve steadily but fail to reach the criterion due to variability (false negatives), while others meet it through a spike without sustained learning (false positives). We evaluate TTC limitations and demonstrate learning curve analysis as a more nuanced approach to investigate learning dynamics. We tested wild striated caracaras (

Indexed as

CognitionReversal LearningAnimalsCognitive FlexibilityFemaleLearningLearning CurveMalecognition in the wildinterindividual variationlearning curve analysisphysical cognitionreplicabilityreversal learningtrials-to-criterion

Identifiers

PMID41255127
PMCPMC12628013

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.