| Title |
Do monkeys compare themselves to others?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Animal Cognition, November 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10071-015-0943-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Vanessa Schmitt, Ira Federspiel, Johanna Eckert, Stefanie Keupp, Laura Tschernek, Lauriane Faraut, Richard Schuster, Corinna Michels, Holger Sennhenn-Reulen, Thomas Bugnyar, Thomas Mussweiler, Julia Fischer |
| Abstract |
Social comparisons are a fundamental characteristic of human behaviour, yet relatively little is known about their evolutionary foundations. Adapting the co-acting paradigm from human research (Seta in J Pers Soc Psychol 42:281-291, 1982. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.42.2.281 ), we examined how the performance of a partner influenced subjects' performance in long-tailed macaques (Macaca fascicularis). Using parallel testing in touch screen setups in which subjects had to discriminate familiar and novel photographs of men and women, we investigated whether accuracy and reaction time were influenced by partner performance and relationship quality (affiliate vs. non-affiliate). Auditory feedback about the alleged performance of the co-actor was provided via playback; partner performance was either moderately or extremely better or worse than subject performance. We predicted that subjects would assimilate to moderately different comparison standards as well as to affiliates and contrast away from extreme standards and non-affiliates. Subjects instantly generalized to novel pictures. While accuracy was not affected by any of the factors, long reaction times occurred more frequently when subjects were tested with a non-affiliate who was performing worse, compared to one who was doing better than them (80 % quantile worse: 5.1, better: 4.3 s). For affiliate co-actors, there was no marked effect (worse: 4.4, better: 4.6 s). In a control condition with no auditory feedback, subjects performed somewhat better in the presence of affiliates (M = 77.8 % correct) compared to non-affiliates (M = 71.1 %), while reaction time was not affected. Apparently, subjects were sensitive to partner identity and performance, yet variation in motivation rather than assimilation and contrast effects may account for the observed effects. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 17% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 17% |
| Germany | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 3 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 3 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 2 | 33% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Austria | 2 | 4% |
| Japan | 1 | 2% |
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Canada | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 52 | 91% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 28% |
| Researcher | 13 | 23% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Unknown | 12 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 17 | 30% |
| Psychology | 13 | 23% |
| Neuroscience | 7 | 12% |
| Environmental Science | 3 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Unknown | 11 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 11 February 2024.
All research outputs
#5,193,725
of 25,477,125 outputs
Outputs from Animal Cognition
#772
of 1,571 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#78,918
of 395,710 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Animal Cognition
#9
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,477,125 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,571 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 36.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 395,710 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 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 63% of its contemporaries.