↓ Skip to main content

Are non-human primates capable of rhythmic entrainment? Evidence for the gradual audiomotor evolution hypothesis

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroscience, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
4 news outlets
blogs
3 blogs
twitter
13 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
176 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
260 Mendeley
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.
Title
Are non-human primates capable of rhythmic entrainment? Evidence for the gradual audiomotor evolution hypothesis
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroscience, January 2014
DOI 10.3389/fnins.2013.00274
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hugo Merchant, Henkjan Honing

Abstract

We propose a decomposition of the neurocognitive mechanisms that might underlie interval-based timing and rhythmic entrainment. Next to reviewing the concepts central to the definition of rhythmic entrainment, we discuss recent studies that suggest rhythmic entrainment to be specific to humans and a selected group of bird species, but, surprisingly, is not obvious in non-human primates. On the basis of these studies we propose the gradual audiomotor evolution hypothesis that suggests that humans fully share interval-based timing with other primates, but only partially share the ability of rhythmic entrainment (or beat-based timing). This hypothesis accommodates the fact that non-human primates (i.e., macaques) performance is comparable to humans in single interval tasks (such as interval reproduction, categorization, and interception), but show differences in multiple interval tasks (such as rhythmic entrainment, synchronization, and continuation). Furthermore, it is in line with the observation that macaques can, apparently, synchronize in the visual domain, but show less sensitivity in the auditory domain. And finally, while macaques are sensitive to interval-based timing and rhythmic grouping, the absence of a strong coupling between the auditory and motor system of non-human primates might be the reason why macaques cannot rhythmically entrain in the way humans do.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 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 260 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 2%
United Kingdom 3 1%
Mexico 2 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 245 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 61 23%
Student > Master 45 17%
Researcher 33 13%
Student > Bachelor 20 8%
Professor 13 5%
Other 45 17%
Unknown 43 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 76 29%
Neuroscience 54 21%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 34 13%
Arts and Humanities 13 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 3%
Other 28 11%
Unknown 48 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 52. 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 11 January 2024.
All research outputs
#813,455
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#344
of 11,538 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,537
of 319,271 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#4
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,538 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 319,271 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 51 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.