| Title |
Responses to familiar and unfamiliar objects by belugas (Delphinapterus leucas), bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus), and Pacific white-sided dolphins (Lagenorhynchus obliquidens)
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Animal Cognition, June 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10071-017-1103-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sara Guarino, Deirdre Yeater, Steve Lacy, Tricia Dees, Heather M. Hill |
| Abstract |
Previous research with bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) demonstrated their ability to discriminate between familiar and unfamiliar stimuli. Dolphins gazed longer at unfamiliar stimuli. The current study attempted to extend this original research by examining the responses of three species of cetaceans to objects that differed in familiarity. Eleven belugas from two facilities, five bottlenose dolphins and five Pacific white-sided dolphins housed at one facility were presented different objects in a free-swim scenario. The results indicated that the animals gazed the longest at unfamiliar objects, but these gaze durations did not significantly differ from gaze durations when viewing familiar objects. Rather, the animals gazed longer at unfamiliar objects when compared to the apparatus alone. Species differences emerged with longer gaze durations exhibited by belugas and bottlenose dolphins and significantly shorter gaze durations for Pacific white-sided dolphins. It is likely that the animals categorized objects into familiar and unfamiliar categories, but the free-swim paradigm in naturalistic social groupings did not elicit clear responses. Rather this procedure emphasized the importance of attention and individual preferences when investigating familiar and unfamiliar objects, which has implications for cognitive research and enrichment use. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 18 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 5 | 28% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 22% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 11% |
| Other | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 11% |
| Unknown | 2 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 33% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 3 | 17% |
| Psychology | 3 | 17% |
| Environmental Science | 2 | 11% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 2 | 11% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 13 March 2023.
All research outputs
#1,991,992
of 25,477,125 outputs
Outputs from Animal Cognition
#421
of 1,571 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#37,681
of 331,647 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Animal Cognition
#8
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,477,125 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,571 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 36.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 331,647 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.