You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Desire for social contact, not empathy, may explain “rescue” behavior in rats
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Animal Cognition, October 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10071-013-0692-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Alan Silberberg, Candice Allouch, Samantha Sandfort, David Kearns, Heather Karpel, Burton Slotnick |
| Abstract |
Ben-Ami Bartal et al. (Science 334:1427-1430, 2011) showed that a rat in an open space (free rat) would touch the front door of a restraining tube to open its rear door, thereby enabling a rat trapped within (trapped rat) to enter a larger space that was farther away from the free rat. Since opening the rear door distanced the trapped rat from the free rat, Ben-Ami Bartal et al. argued free-rat behavior could not be motivated by the pursuit of social contact. Instead, this rat was empathically motivated, its goal being to reduce the presumed distress of the rat trapped in the restraining tube. In two experiments, we show that (a) a free rat will not learn to touch the front door to open the rear door when it is the first condition of the experiment; (b) over time, a trapped rat will often return to a restraining tube despite its presumed aversiveness; and (c) a free rat experienced in touching the front door will continue to touch it even if touching does not free the trapped rat. We explain these results and Ben-Ami Bartal et al.'s in terms of two processes, neophobia and the pursuit of social contact. When first placed in a restraining tube, neophobia causes the trapped rat to escape the tube when the rear door is opened. Across sessions, neophobia diminishes, permitting the rats' pursuit of social contact to emerge and dominate free- and trapped-rat behavior. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Saudi Arabia | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 201 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 1% |
| Germany | 2 | <1% |
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| Hungary | 1 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Montenegro | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Poland | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 189 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 45 | 22% |
| Student > Master | 33 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 31 | 15% |
| Researcher | 29 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 11 | 5% |
| Other | 27 | 13% |
| Unknown | 25 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 59 | 29% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 58 | 29% |
| Neuroscience | 33 | 16% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 1% |
| Philosophy | 3 | 1% |
| Other | 14 | 7% |
| Unknown | 31 | 15% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 63. 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 16 January 2022.
All research outputs
#603,092
of 23,605,418 outputs
Outputs from Animal Cognition
#150
of 1,488 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,435
of 212,225 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Animal Cognition
#6
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,605,418 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,488 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 34.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 212,225 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.