| Title |
Baboons (Papio papio), but not humans, break cognitive set in a visuomotor task
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Animal Cognition, July 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10071-015-0904-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sarah M. Pope, Adrien Meguerditchian, William D. Hopkins, Joël Fagot |
| Abstract |
Cognitive set can be both helpful and harmful in problem solving. A large set of similar problems may be solved mechanically by applying a single-solution method. However, efficiency might be sacrificed if a better solution exists and is overlooked. Despite half a century of research on cognitive set, there have been no attempts to investigate whether it occurs in nonhuman species. The current study utilized a nonverbal, computer task to compare cognitive set between 104 humans and 15 baboons (Papio papio). A substantial difference was found between humans' and baboons' abilities to break cognitive set. Consistent with previous studies, the majority of humans were highly impaired by set, yet baboons were almost completely unaffected. Analysis of the human data revealed that children (aged 7-10) were significantly better able to break set than adolescents (11-18) and adults (19-68). Both the evolutionary and developmental implications of these findings are discussed. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 9 | 90% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 70% |
| Scientists | 2 | 20% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 10% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Senegal | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 36 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 24% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 11% |
| Researcher | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 6 | 16% |
| Unknown | 9 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 17 | 46% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 11% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Unknown | 11 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. 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 23 May 2022.
All research outputs
#1,573,748
of 24,220,836 outputs
Outputs from Animal Cognition
#356
of 1,532 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,444
of 268,212 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Animal Cognition
#6
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,220,836 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 1,532 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 268,212 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.