↓ Skip to main content

Visual search for orientation of faces by a chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes): face-specific upright superiority and the role of facial configural properties

Overview of attention for article published in Primates, September 2006
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
56 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 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
Visual search for orientation of faces by a chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes): face-specific upright superiority and the role of facial configural properties
Published in
Primates, September 2006
DOI 10.1007/s10329-006-0011-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Masaki Tomonaga

Abstract

A previous experiment showed that a chimpanzee performed better in searching for a target human face that differed in orientation from distractors when the target had an upright orientation than when targets had inverted or horizontal orientation [Tomonaga (1999a) Primate Res 15:215-229]. This upright superiority effect was also seen when using chimpanzee faces as targets but not when using photographs of a house. The present study sought to extend these results and explore factors affecting the face-specific upright superiority effect. Upright superiority was shown in a visual search for orientation when caricaturized human faces and dog faces were used as stimuli for the chimpanzee but not when shapes of a hand and chairs were presented. Thus, the configural properties of facial features, which cause an inversion effect in face recognition in humans and chimpanzees, were thought to be a source of the upright superiority effect in the visual search process. To examine this possibility, various stimuli manipulations were introduced in subsequent experiments. The results clearly show that the configuration of facial features plays a critical role in the upright superiority effect, and strongly suggest similarity in face processing in humans and chimpanzees.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Brazil 1 2%
Unknown 43 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 22%
Researcher 9 20%
Student > Bachelor 6 13%
Student > Master 4 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 7%
Other 10 22%
Unknown 3 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 13 29%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 29%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 9%
Neuroscience 3 7%
Unspecified 2 4%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 5 11%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 22 January 2013.
All research outputs
#7,453,479
of 22,786,691 outputs
Outputs from Primates
#470
of 1,014 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,227
of 67,057 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Primates
#3
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,786,691 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,014 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.3. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 67,057 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 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.