↓ Skip to main content

No evidence for self-recognition in a small passerine, the great tit (Parus major) judged from the mark/mirror test

Overview of attention for article published in Animal Cognition, July 2017
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 (89th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
9 X users
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
65 Mendeley
Title
No evidence for self-recognition in a small passerine, the great tit (Parus major) judged from the mark/mirror test
Published in
Animal Cognition, July 2017
DOI 10.1007/s10071-017-1121-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fanny-Linn Kraft, Tereza Forštová, A. Utku Urhan, Alice Exnerová, Anders Brodin

Abstract

Self-recognition is a trait presumed to be associated with high levels of cognition and something previously considered to be exclusive to humans and possibly apes. The most common test of self-recognition is the mark/mirror test of whether an animal can understand that it sees its own reflection in a mirror. The usual design is that an animal is marked with a colour spot somewhere on the body where the spot can only be seen by the animal by using a mirror. Very few species have passed this test, and among birds, only magpies have been affirmatively demonstrated to pass it. In this study, we tested great tits (Parus major), small passerines, that are known for their innovative foraging skills and good problem-solving abilities, in the mirror self-recognition test. We found no indication that they have any ability of this kind and believe that they are unlikely to be capable of this type of self-recognition.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 65 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 15 23%
Student > Master 11 17%
Researcher 9 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 12%
Other 3 5%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 13 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 27 42%
Psychology 9 14%
Unspecified 2 3%
Neuroscience 2 3%
Environmental Science 2 3%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 18 28%
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 17 April 2023.
All research outputs
#1,799,940
of 24,618,075 outputs
Outputs from Animal Cognition
#398
of 1,544 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#35,014
of 320,893 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Animal Cognition
#12
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,618,075 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 1,544 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.2. 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 320,893 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 89% 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 52% of its contemporaries.