↓ Skip to main content

Social comparison mediates chimpanzees’ responses to loss, not frustration

Overview of attention for article published in Animal Cognition, June 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
4 news outlets
twitter
9 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
38 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
59 Mendeley
Title
Social comparison mediates chimpanzees’ responses to loss, not frustration
Published in
Animal Cognition, June 2014
DOI 10.1007/s10071-014-0765-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lydia M. Hopper, Susan P. Lambeth, Steven J. Schapiro, Sarah F. Brosnan

Abstract

Why do chimpanzees react when their partner gets a better deal than them? Do they note the inequity or do their responses reflect frustration in response to unattainable rewards? To tease apart inequity and contrast, we tested chimpanzees in a series of conditions that created loss through individual contrast, through inequity, or by both. Chimpanzees were tested in four social and two individual conditions in which they received food rewards in return for exchanging tokens with an experimenter. In conditions designed to create individual contrast, after completing an exchange, the chimpanzees were given a relatively less-preferred reward than the one they were previously shown. The chimpanzees' willingness to accept the less-preferred rewards was independent of previously offered foods in both the social and individual conditions. In conditions that created frustration through inequity, subjects were given a less-preferred reward than the one received by their partner, but not in relation to the reward they were previously offered. In a social context, females were more likely to refuse to participate when they received a less-preferred reward than their partner (disadvantageous inequity), than when they received a more-preferred reward (advantageous inequity). Specifically, the females' refusals were typified by refusals to exchange tokens rather than refusals to accept food rewards. Males showed no difference in their responses to inequity or individual contrast. These results support previous evidence that some chimpanzees' responses to inequity are mediated more strongly by what others receive than by frustration effects.

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 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 2%
Germany 1 2%
Uruguay 1 2%
Romania 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 54 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 10%
Student > Master 5 8%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Other 16 27%
Unknown 7 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 21 36%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 24%
Social Sciences 5 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Mathematics 1 2%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 13 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 45. 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 02 June 2018.
All research outputs
#868,626
of 24,364,603 outputs
Outputs from Animal Cognition
#213
of 1,534 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,529
of 231,326 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Animal Cognition
#5
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,364,603 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,534 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 231,326 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.