| Title |
A multidisciplinary view on cultural primatology: behavioral innovations and traditions in Japanese macaques
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Primates, February 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10329-016-0518-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jean-Baptiste Leca, Noëlle Gunst, Amanda N. Pelletier, Paul L. Vasey, Charmalie A. D. Nahallage, Kunio Watanabe, Michael A. Huffman |
| Abstract |
Cultural primatology (i.e., the study of behavioral traditions in nonhuman primates as a window into the evolution of human cultural capacities) was founded in Japan by Kinji Imanishi in the early 1950s. This relatively new research area straddles different disciplines and now benefits from collaborations between Japanese and Western primatologists. In this paper, we return to the cradle of cultural primatology by revisiting our original articles on behavioral innovations and traditions in Japanese macaques. For the past 35 years, our international team of biologists, psychologists and anthropologists from Japan, France, Sri Lanka, the USA and Canada, has been taking an integrative approach to addressing the influence of environmental, sociodemographic, developmental, cognitive and behavioral constraints on the appearance, diffusion, and maintenance of behavioral traditions in Macaca fuscata across various domains; namely, feeding innovation, tool use, object play, and non-conceptive sex. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 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 | 2 | 10% |
| France | 1 | 5% |
| Russia | 1 | 5% |
| Canada | 1 | 5% |
| Denmark | 1 | 5% |
| Spain | 1 | 5% |
| Ecuador | 1 | 5% |
| United States | 1 | 5% |
| India | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 10 | 48% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 14 | 67% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 4 | 19% |
| Scientists | 3 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| India | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 41 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 17% |
| Researcher | 6 | 14% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 6 | 14% |
| Unknown | 6 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 13 | 31% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 17% |
| Psychology | 6 | 14% |
| Environmental Science | 3 | 7% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 10% |
| Unknown | 7 | 17% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 20 May 2021.
All research outputs
#2,990,749
of 25,559,053 outputs
Outputs from Primates
#207
of 1,075 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#50,433
of 410,935 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Primates
#9
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,559,053 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,075 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 410,935 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 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 55% of its contemporaries.