↓ Skip to main content

Human male pair bonding and testosterone

Overview of attention for article published in Human Nature, June 2004
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 (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
4 X users
wikipedia
4 Wikipedia pages
video
2 YouTube creators

Citations

dimensions_citation
98 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
126 Mendeley
Title
Human male pair bonding and testosterone
Published in
Human Nature, June 2004
DOI 10.1007/s12110-004-1016-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Peter B. Gray, Judith Flynn Chapman, Terence C. Burnham, Matthew H. McIntyre, Susan F. Lipson, Peter T. Ellison

Abstract

Previous research in North America has supported the view that male involvement in committed, romantic relationships is associated with lower testosterone (T) levels. Here, we test the prediction that undergraduate men involved in committed, romantic relationships (paired) will have lower T levels than men not involved in such relationships (unpaired). Further, we also test whether these differences are more apparent in samples collected later, rather than earlier, in the day. For this study, 107 undergraduate men filled out a questionnaire and collected one saliva sample (from which a subject's T level was measured) at various times across the day. As in previous studies, men involved in committed, romantic relationships had lower salivary T levels, though only during later times of the day. Furthermore, additional analysis of the variation among unpaired subjects indicated that men without prior relationship experience had lower T levels than experienced men. Finally, while paired men as a group had lower T levels than unpaired men, those men at the earliest stage (less than six months) of a current relationship had higher T levels than unpaired men as well as men in longer-term relationships. These results suggest that variation in male testosterone levels may reflect differential behavioral allocation to mating effort.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 126 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 4%
Czechia 4 3%
United Kingdom 2 2%
Hungary 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Unknown 112 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 28 22%
Student > Bachelor 18 14%
Student > Master 14 11%
Other 12 10%
Researcher 10 8%
Other 34 27%
Unknown 10 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 50 40%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 27 21%
Social Sciences 19 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 3%
Environmental Science 4 3%
Other 12 10%
Unknown 10 8%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 06 October 2022.
All research outputs
#2,590,973
of 24,284,650 outputs
Outputs from Human Nature
#202
of 534 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,848
of 60,289 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Human Nature
#2
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,284,650 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 534 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 31.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 60,289 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.