ArticlePloS one2025
Testing weight-based conditional discrimination in Goffin's cockatoos, Cacatua goffiniana.
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.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.