↓ Skip to main content

Caching at a distance: a cache protection strategy in Eurasian jays

Overview of attention for article published in Animal Cognition, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
35 Mendeley
Title
Caching at a distance: a cache protection strategy in Eurasian jays
Published in
Animal Cognition, March 2016
DOI 10.1007/s10071-016-0972-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Edward W. Legg, Ljerka Ostojić, Nicola S. Clayton

Abstract

A fundamental question about the complexity of corvid social cognition is whether behaviours exhibited when caching in front of potential pilferers represent specific attempts to prevent cache loss (cache protection hypothesis) or whether they are by-products of other behaviours (by-product hypothesis). Here, we demonstrate that Eurasian jays preferentially cache at a distance when observed by conspecifics. This preference for a 'far' location could be either a by-product of a general preference for caching at that specific location regardless of the risk of cache loss or a by-product of a general preference to be far away from conspecifics due to low intra-species tolerance. Critically, we found that neither by-product account explains the jays' behaviour: the preference for the 'far' location was not shown when caching in private or when eating in front of a conspecific. In line with the cache protection hypothesis we found that jays preferred the distant location only when caching in front of a conspecific. Thus, it seems likely that for Eurasian jays, caching at a distance from an observer is a specific cache protection strategy.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 3%
Canada 1 3%
Unknown 33 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 20%
Researcher 4 11%
Student > Master 4 11%
Other 3 9%
Professor 2 6%
Other 5 14%
Unknown 10 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 34%
Psychology 8 23%
Unspecified 1 3%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 3%
Engineering 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 12 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 June 2016.
All research outputs
#15,364,458
of 22,856,968 outputs
Outputs from Animal Cognition
#1,226
of 1,456 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#179,101
of 300,005 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Animal Cognition
#27
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,856,968 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,456 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.4. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 300,005 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.