Early Emergence of Auditory Quantity Discrimination in Domestic Chicks

preprint OA: closed
Full text JSON View at publisher
Full text 1,848 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · click to expand
Abstract Numerical abilities are widespread in the animal kingdom and are not exclusive to humans. Domestic chicks (Gallus gallus) have been shown to discriminate numerosities spontaneously, but prior research has focused exclusively on the visual modality. Whether chicks can discriminate numerical information in the auditory domain remains unknown, despite evidence that they can perceive other auditory features such as tone and rhythm. In this study, we investigated spontaneous numerical discrimination in the auditory modality in naïve domestic chicks. In Experiment 1, newly-hatched chicks were tested for their ability to discriminate between two auditory sequences differing in numerosity (4 vs. 12 identical sounds), with and without controlling for continuous variables such as duration and total sound amount. Experiment 2 examined chicks’ filial imprinting responses to familiar or unfamiliar numerosities. Experiment 3 controlled for potential spontaneous preferences for a single longer sound versus a shorter one. Our results showed a preference for the 12-sound sequence only when duration and total sound amount were not matched. When these continuous variables were controlled, no spontaneous numerical preference emerged. Experiment 2 revealed an overall preference for the 12-sound sequence regardless of imprinting conditions, while Experiment 3 confirmed that chicks do not have an inherent preference for longer sounds. These findings suggest that chicks are sensitive to overall magnitude in the auditory domain but do not spontaneously discriminate numerical differences when other continuous variables are held constant. Future studies will explore how specific stimulus features, such as heterogeneity of sounds, influence these preferences. Competing Interest Statement The authors have declared no competing interest.

Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-doi-fallback

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. This is a recent paper (2026) — citers typically take a year or two to land, and the OpenAlex reference graph may still be filling in.

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-05-20T01:45:00.602351+00:00