↓ Skip to main content

Michigan Publishing

Lethal aggression in Pan is better explained by adaptive strategies than human impacts

Overview of attention for article published in Nature, September 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 (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
184 news outlets
blogs
25 blogs
twitter
3440 X users
facebook
15 Facebook pages
wikipedia
4 Wikipedia pages
googleplus
6 Google+ users

Citations

dimensions_citation
350 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
504 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Lethal aggression in Pan is better explained by adaptive strategies than human impacts
Published in
Nature, September 2014
DOI 10.1038/nature13727
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael L. Wilson, Christophe Boesch, Barbara Fruth, Takeshi Furuichi, Ian C. Gilby, Chie Hashimoto, Catherine L. Hobaiter, Gottfried Hohmann, Noriko Itoh, Kathelijne Koops, Julia N. Lloyd, Tetsuro Matsuzawa, John C. Mitani, Deus C. Mjungu, David Morgan, Martin N. Muller, Roger Mundry, Michio Nakamura, Jill Pruetz, Anne E. Pusey, Julia Riedel, Crickette Sanz, Anne M. Schel, Nicole Simmons, Michel Waller, David P. Watts, Frances White, Roman M. Wittig, Klaus Zuberbühler, Richard W. Wrangham

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3,440 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 504 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 8 2%
United Kingdom 3 <1%
Germany 2 <1%
Netherlands 2 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Romania 1 <1%
Czechia 1 <1%
Other 4 <1%
Unknown 480 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 105 21%
Student > Bachelor 82 16%
Researcher 75 15%
Student > Master 59 12%
Professor 40 8%
Other 82 16%
Unknown 61 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 182 36%
Psychology 78 15%
Social Sciences 37 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 18 4%
Environmental Science 17 3%
Other 85 17%
Unknown 87 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3345. 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 15 April 2024.
All research outputs
#1,806
of 25,782,229 outputs
Outputs from Nature
#179
of 98,746 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9
of 260,820 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature
#4
of 994 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,782,229 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 98,746 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 102.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 260,820 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 994 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 99% of its contemporaries.