↓ Skip to main content

Mobile phones as lekking devices among human males

Overview of attention for article published in Human Nature, March 2000
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 (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
70 Mendeley
Title
Mobile phones as lekking devices among human males
Published in
Human Nature, March 2000
DOI 10.1007/s12110-000-1004-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

J. E. Lycett, R. I. M. Dunbar

Abstract

This study investigated the use of mobile telephones by males and females in a public bar frequented by professional people. We found that, unlike women, men who possess mobile telephones more often publicly display them, and that these displays were related to the number of men in a social group, but not the number of women. This result was not due simply to a greater number of males who have telephones: we found an increase with male social group size in the proportion of available telephones that were on display. Similarly, there was a positive relationship between the number of visible telephones and the ratio of males to females. Our results further show that the increased display of telephones in groups with more males is not due to the ostensive function of these devices (i.e., the making and receiving of calls), although single males tended to use their phones more. We interpret these results within the framework of male-male competition, with males in larger group sizes functioning in an increasingly competitive environment. This competitive environment is suggested to be akin to a lek mating system in which males aggregate and actively display their qualities to females who assess males on a number of dimensions. We suggest that mobile telephones might be used by males as an indicator of their status and wealth (sensu "cultural ornaments").

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 4%
United Kingdom 3 4%
Chile 1 1%
Italy 1 1%
Australia 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
Austria 1 1%
South Africa 1 1%
Unknown 58 83%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 12 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 14%
Researcher 9 13%
Professor 8 11%
Other 6 9%
Other 17 24%
Unknown 8 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 25 36%
Social Sciences 13 19%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 16%
Arts and Humanities 4 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 3%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 9 13%
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 19 August 2015.
All research outputs
#2,445,976
of 23,342,092 outputs
Outputs from Human Nature
#190
of 519 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,133
of 40,691 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Human Nature
#2
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,342,092 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 519 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 31.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 40,691 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.