↓ Skip to main content

Global/local processing of hierarchical visual stimuli in a conflict–choice task by capuchin monkeys (Sapajus spp.)

Overview of attention for article published in Animal Cognition, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
15 Mendeley
Title
Global/local processing of hierarchical visual stimuli in a conflict–choice task by capuchin monkeys (Sapajus spp.)
Published in
Animal Cognition, November 2016
DOI 10.1007/s10071-016-1057-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Valentina Truppa, Paola Carducci, Diego Antonio De Simone, Angelo Bisazza, Carlo De Lillo

Abstract

In the last two decades, comparative research has addressed the issue of how the global and local levels of structure of visual stimuli are processed by different species, using Navon-type hierarchical figures, i.e. smaller local elements that form larger global configurations. Determining whether or not the variety of procedures adopted to test different species with hierarchical figures are equivalent is of crucial importance to ensure comparability of results. Among non-human species, global/local processing has been extensively studied in tufted capuchin monkeys using matching-to-sample tasks with hierarchical patterns. Local dominance has emerged consistently in these New World primates. In the present study, we assessed capuchins' processing of hierarchical stimuli with a method frequently adopted in studies of global/local processing in non-primate species: the conflict-choice task. Different from the matching-to-sample procedure, this task involved processing local and global information retained in long-term memory. Capuchins were trained to discriminate between consistent hierarchical stimuli (similar global and local shape) and then tested with inconsistent hierarchical stimuli (different global and local shapes). We found that capuchins preferred the hierarchical stimuli featuring the correct local elements rather than those with the correct global configuration. This finding confirms that capuchins' local dominance, typically observed using matching-to-sample procedures, is also expressed as a local preference in the conflict-choice task. Our study adds to the growing body of comparative studies on visual grouping functions by demonstrating that the methods most frequently used in the literature on global/local processing produce analogous results irrespective of extent of the involvement of memory processes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users 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 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 15 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 40%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 7%
Student > Bachelor 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Student > Master 1 7%
Other 3 20%
Unknown 2 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 6 40%
Neuroscience 2 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 7%
Engineering 1 7%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 21 November 2016.
All research outputs
#17,826,759
of 22,901,818 outputs
Outputs from Animal Cognition
#1,305
of 1,458 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#287,043
of 417,510 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Animal Cognition
#24
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,901,818 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,458 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.4. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 417,510 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.