↓ Skip to main content

Cooperative hunting roles among taï chimpanzees

Overview of attention for article published in Human Nature, March 2002
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 (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
4 news outlets
twitter
1 X user
wikipedia
4 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
228 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
223 Mendeley
Title
Cooperative hunting roles among taï chimpanzees
Published in
Human Nature, March 2002
DOI 10.1007/s12110-002-1013-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christophe Boesch

Abstract

All known chimpanzee populations have been observed to hunt small mammals for meat. Detailed observations have shown, however, that hunting strategies differ considerably between populations, with some merely collecting prey that happens to pass by while others hunt in coordinated groups to chase fast-moving prey. Of all known populations, Taï chimpanzees exhibit the highest level of cooperation when hunting. Some of the group hunting roles require elaborate coordination with other hunters as well as precise anticipation of the movements of the prey. The meat-sharing rules observed in this community guarantee the largest share of the meat to hunters who perform the most important roles leading to a capture. The learning time of such hunting roles is sometimes especially long. Taï chimpanzee males begin hunting monkeys at about age 10. The hunters' progress in learning the more sophisticated hunting roles is clearly correlated with age; only after 20 years of practice are they able to perform them reliably. This lengthy learning period has also been shown in some hunter-gatherer societies and confirms the special challenge that hunting represents.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 223 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 6 3%
Germany 2 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Israel 1 <1%
Unknown 211 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 59 26%
Researcher 37 17%
Student > Master 30 13%
Student > Bachelor 21 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 4%
Other 37 17%
Unknown 30 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 74 33%
Psychology 48 22%
Environmental Science 15 7%
Social Sciences 13 6%
Arts and Humanities 8 4%
Other 26 12%
Unknown 39 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 41. 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 26 October 2023.
All research outputs
#950,906
of 24,682,395 outputs
Outputs from Human Nature
#102
of 540 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#686
of 47,788 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Human Nature
#2
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,682,395 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 540 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 31.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 47,788 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.