↓ Skip to main content

Human evolution and cognition

Overview of attention for article published in Theory in Biosciences, May 2010
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#37 of 218)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
88 Mendeley
Title
Human evolution and cognition
Published in
Theory in Biosciences, May 2010
DOI 10.1007/s12064-010-0093-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ian Tattersall

Abstract

Human beings are distinguished from all other organisms by their symbolic way of processing information about the world. This unique cognitive style is qualitatively different from all the earlier hominid cognitive styles, and is not simply an improved version of them. The hominid fossil and archaeological records show clearly that biological and technological innovations have typically been highly sporadic, and totally out of phase, since the invention of stone tools some 2.5 million years ago. They also confirm that this pattern applied in the arrival of modern cognition: the anatomically recognizable species Homo sapiens was well established long before any population of it began to show indications of behaving symbolically. This places the origin of symbolic thought in the realms of exaptation, whereby new structures come into existence before being recruited to new uses, and of emergence, whereby entire new levels of complexity are achieved through new combinations of attributes unremarkable in themselves. Both these phenomena involve entirely routine evolutionary processes; special as we human beings may consider ourselves, there was nothing special about the way we came into existence. Modern human cognition is a very recent acquisition; and its emergence ushered in an entirely new pattern of technological (and other behavioral) innovation, in which constant change results from the ceaseless exploration of the potential inherent in our new capacity.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 88 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Colombia 1 1%
France 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
New Zealand 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 83 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 19%
Student > Bachelor 17 19%
Student > Master 12 14%
Researcher 10 11%
Professor 6 7%
Other 16 18%
Unknown 10 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 23 26%
Social Sciences 9 10%
Psychology 9 10%
Linguistics 7 8%
Arts and Humanities 5 6%
Other 22 25%
Unknown 13 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 May 2020.
All research outputs
#4,616,213
of 25,755,403 outputs
Outputs from Theory in Biosciences
#37
of 218 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,223
of 106,064 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Theory in Biosciences
#3
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,755,403 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 218 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 106,064 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.