↓ Skip to main content

Seeing and Knowing: Knowledge Attribution Versus Stimulus Control in Adult Humans (Homo sapiens )

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Comparative Psychology, January 1995
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
peer_reviews
1 peer review site
wikipedia
5 Wikipedia pages

Readers on

mendeley
39 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.
Article details
Title
Seeing and Knowing: Knowledge Attribution Versus Stimulus Control in Adult Humans (Homo sapiens )
Published in
Journal of Comparative Psychology, January 1995
DOI 10.1037/0735-7036.109.2.107
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Interest in cognition in nonhuman animals has inspired new approaches to discovering animals' ability to attribute knowledge to others (e.g., D. J. Povinelli, K. E. Nelson, & S. T. Boysen, 1990). The assumptions of such experiments were tested in this study by training a group of humans (Homo sapiens) to use accurate information provided by a confederate who was watching as 1 container among 4 was baited; a 2nd group was similarly trained to use accurate information provided by a confederate whose back was turned during baiting. On a single reversal trial, the roles of the 2 confederates were switched. Subjects were able to learn their respective tasks but attended to different aspects of the confederates, as revealed by the reversal trial. Although attributional interpretations can be applied to such data, many of the choices in this experiment can be explained more readily with the basic principles of contingency-based learning.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 3%
France 1 3%
Unknown 37 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 21%
Student > Master 7 18%
Researcher 6 15%
Other 3 8%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Other 5 13%
Unknown 7 18%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 13 33%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 13%
Linguistics 2 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 5%
Neuroscience 2 5%
Other 5 13%
Unknown 10 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 March 2024.
All research outputs
#7,047,954
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Comparative Psychology
#328
of 1,586 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,354
of 76,631 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Comparative Psychology
#5
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,586 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 76,631 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
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 has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.