↓ Skip to main content

Sex Differences in Exploration Behavior and the Relationship to Harm Avoidance

Overview of attention for article published in Human Nature, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
12 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
41 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
51 Mendeley
Title
Sex Differences in Exploration Behavior and the Relationship to Harm Avoidance
Published in
Human Nature, December 2015
DOI 10.1007/s12110-015-9248-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kyle T. Gagnon, Elizabeth A. Cashdan, Jeanine K. Stefanucci, Sarah H. Creem-Regehr

Abstract

Venturing into novel terrain poses physical risks to a female and her offspring. Females have a greater tendency to avoid physical harm, while males tend to have larger range sizes and often outperform females in navigation-related tasks. Given this backdrop, we expected that females would explore a novel environment with more caution than males, and that more-cautious exploration would negatively affect navigation performance. Participants explored a novel, large-scale, virtual environment in search of five objects, pointed in the direction of each object from the origin, and then navigated back to the objects. We found that females demonstrated more caution while exploring as reflected in the increased amounts of pausing and revisiting of previously traversed locations. In addition, more pausing and revisiting behaviors led to degradation in navigation performance. Finally, individual levels of trait harm avoidance were positively associated with the amount of revisiting behavior during exploration. These findings support the idea that the fitness costs associated with long-distance travel may encourage females to take a more cautious approach to spatial exploration, and that this caution may partially explain the sex differences in navigation performance.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 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 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 1 2%
Unknown 50 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 18%
Student > Master 8 16%
Student > Bachelor 7 14%
Researcher 6 12%
Other 3 6%
Other 7 14%
Unknown 11 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 18 35%
Social Sciences 4 8%
Neuroscience 4 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Other 11 22%
Unknown 12 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 18 January 2017.
All research outputs
#2,313,541
of 25,754,670 outputs
Outputs from Human Nature
#182
of 550 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#37,047
of 397,326 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Human Nature
#4
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,754,670 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 550 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 397,326 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.