↓ Skip to main content

Quantity-based judgments in the domestic dog (Canis lupus familiaris)

Overview of attention for article published in Animal Cognition, August 2006
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
2 blogs
peer_reviews
1 peer review site

Citations

dimensions_citation
142 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
274 Mendeley
Title
Quantity-based judgments in the domestic dog (Canis lupus familiaris)
Published in
Animal Cognition, August 2006
DOI 10.1007/s10071-006-0042-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Camille Ward, Barbara B. Smuts

Abstract

We examined the ability of domestic dogs to choose the larger versus smaller quantity of food in two experiments. In experiment 1, we investigated the ability of 29 dogs (results from 18 dogs were used in the data analysis) to discriminate between two quantities of food presented in eight different combinations. Choices were simultaneously presented and visually available at the time of choice. Overall, subjects chose the larger quantity more often than the smaller quantity, but they found numerically close comparisons more difficult. In experiment 2, we tested two dogs from experiment 1 under three conditions. In condition 1, we used similar methods from experiment 1 and tested the dogs multiple times on the eight combinations from experiment 1 plus one additional combination. In conditions 2 and 3, the food was visually unavailable to the subjects at the time of choice, but in condition 2, food choices were viewed simultaneously before being made visually unavailable, and in condition 3, they were viewed successively. In these last two conditions, and especially in condition 3, the dogs had to keep track of quantities mentally in order to choose optimally. Subjects still chose the larger quantity more often than the smaller quantity when the food was not simultaneously visible at the time of choice. Olfactory cues and inadvertent cuing by the experimenter were excluded as mechanisms for choosing larger quantities. The results suggest that, like apes tested on similar tasks, some dogs can form internal representations and make mental comparisons of quantity.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 274 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 4 1%
United States 4 1%
India 3 1%
United Kingdom 3 1%
Austria 2 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
United Arab Emirates 1 <1%
Czechia 1 <1%
Iran, Islamic Republic of 1 <1%
Other 5 2%
Unknown 249 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 63 23%
Researcher 59 22%
Student > Master 35 13%
Student > Bachelor 25 9%
Other 20 7%
Other 43 16%
Unknown 29 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 124 45%
Psychology 48 18%
Environmental Science 25 9%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 8 3%
Social Sciences 6 2%
Other 19 7%
Unknown 44 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 05 June 2019.
All research outputs
#1,563,946
of 22,721,584 outputs
Outputs from Animal Cognition
#366
of 1,442 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,789
of 66,763 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Animal Cognition
#2
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,721,584 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,442 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 66,763 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.