↓ Skip to main content

Effects of landmark distance and stability on accuracy of reward relocation

Overview of attention for article published in Animal Cognition, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 Mendeley
Title
Effects of landmark distance and stability on accuracy of reward relocation
Published in
Animal Cognition, July 2015
DOI 10.1007/s10071-015-0896-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

David J. Pritchard, T. Andrew Hurly, Susan D. Healy

Abstract

Although small-scale navigation is well studied in a wide range of species, much of what is known about landmark use by vertebrates is based on laboratory experiments. To investigate how vertebrates in the wild use landmarks, we trained wild male rufous hummingbirds to feed from a flower that was placed in a constant spatial relationship with two artificial landmarks. In the first experiment, the landmarks and flower were 0.25, 0.5 or 1 m apart and we always moved them 3-4 m after each visit by the bird. In the second experiment, the landmarks and flower were always 0.25 m apart and we moved them either 1 or 0.25 m between trials. In tests, in which we removed the flower, the hummingbirds stopped closer to the predicted flower location when the landmarks had been closer to the flower during training. However, while the distance that the birds stopped from the landmarks and predicted flower location was unaffected by the distance that the landmarks moved between trials, the birds directed their search nearer to the predicted direction of the flower, relative to the landmarks, when the landmarks and flower were more stable in the environment. In the field, then, landmarks alone were sufficient for the birds to determine the distance of a reward but not its direction.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 2 7%
Unknown 26 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 8 29%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 21%
Researcher 4 14%
Student > Master 3 11%
Unspecified 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 5 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 46%
Psychology 6 21%
Environmental Science 1 4%
Unspecified 1 4%
Unknown 7 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 16 October 2015.
All research outputs
#22,422,394
of 25,016,456 outputs
Outputs from Animal Cognition
#1,487
of 1,553 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#229,661
of 269,298 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Animal Cognition
#34
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,016,456 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,553 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.9. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 269,298 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.