Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41417861›Full record

ArticlePloS one2025

Testing weight-based conditional discrimination in Goffin's cockatoos, Cacatua goffiniana.

Poppy J Lambert, Antonia Rippel-Rachle, Alice M I Auersperg

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 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

3 authors.

Poppy J LambertMesserli Research Institute, University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, Vienna, Austria.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0573-7891
Antonia Rippel-RachleMesserli Research Institute, University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Alice M I AuerspergMesserli Research Institute, University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, Vienna, Austria.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Discrimination learning tasks are a method for investigating species' perception of and associative learning with a particular stimulus. Goffin's cockatoos previously required surprisingly few trials to differentiate objects based on weight alone in a simple discrimination task, outperforming primates in other weight discrimination setups. Nevertheless, it was unclear whether the difference in performance was largely based on ability or differences in experimental procedures. Therefore, we tested a group of Goffin's cockatoos on a weight-based conditional discrimination, like a task previously used with chimpanzees. Similar to the chimpanzees (compared to their first 15 sessions), none of our subjects reached above-chance levels of performance in the present study. The contrasting performance of our cockatoos in the two weight discrimination studies are in line with the idea that conditional discriminations are more cognitively demanding than simple discriminations. Our results do not support the notion of a distinct difference between birds and primates in their arbitrary discrimination learning abilities with weight cues. However, further research on this question (we suggest with simple discrimination formats) would be necessary.

Indexed as

CockatoosDiscrimination LearningWeight PerceptionAnimalsBehavior, AnimalFemaleMale

Identifiers

PMID41417861
PMCPMC12716734

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.