↓ Skip to main content

Unidirectional adaptation in tempo in pairs of chimpanzees during simultaneous tapping movement: an examination under face-to-face setup

Overview of attention for article published in Primates, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Readers on

mendeley
20 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
Unidirectional adaptation in tempo in pairs of chimpanzees during simultaneous tapping movement: an examination under face-to-face setup
Published in
Primates, January 2016
DOI 10.1007/s10329-016-0512-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lira Yu, Masaki Tomonaga

Abstract

Many studies have reported a spontaneous nature to synchronized movement in humans and in non-human primates. However, it is not yet clear whether individuals mutually adapt their movement to each other or whether one individual significantly changes to synchronize with the other. In the current study, we examined a directionality of the tempo adaptation to understand an introductive process of interactional synchrony in pairs of chimpanzees. Four pairs, consisting of five female chimpanzees, produced a finger-tapping movement under a face-to-face experimental setup where both auditory and visual cues of the partner's movement were available. Two test conditions were prepared: alone and paired. An analysis of the tapping tempo depending on condition showed that only one chimpanzee in each pair significantly changed their tapping tempo in the direction of the partner's tapping tempo in the paired condition compared with the alone condition. The current study demonstrated that unidirectional adaptation in tempo occurs in pairs of chimpanzees when they simultaneously produce the tapping movement under auditory and visual interaction.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 5%
Unknown 19 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 20%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 15%
Student > Bachelor 3 15%
Researcher 2 10%
Student > Master 2 10%
Other 2 10%
Unknown 4 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 9 45%
Philosophy 2 10%
Neuroscience 2 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 26 January 2016.
All research outputs
#14,832,901
of 22,840,638 outputs
Outputs from Primates
#816
of 1,014 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#219,784
of 394,770 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Primates
#12
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,840,638 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 17th percentile – i.e., 17% 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 394,770 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.