↓ Skip to main content

Bonobos Share with Strangers

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, January 2013
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
24 news outlets
blogs
5 blogs
twitter
95 X users
facebook
22 Facebook pages
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages
googleplus
4 Google+ users
reddit
3 Redditors
video
2 YouTube creators

Citations

dimensions_citation
187 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
1390 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
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
Bonobos Share with Strangers
Published in
PLOS ONE, January 2013
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0051922
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jingzhi Tan, Brian Hare

Abstract

Humans are thought to possess a unique proclivity to share with others--including strangers. This puzzling phenomenon has led many to suggest that sharing with strangers originates from human-unique language, social norms, warfare and/or cooperative breeding. However, bonobos, our closest living relative, are highly tolerant and, in the wild, are capable of having affiliative interactions with strangers. In four experiments, we therefore examined whether bonobos will voluntarily donate food to strangers. We show that bonobos will forego their own food for the benefit of interacting with a stranger. Their prosociality is in part driven by unselfish motivation, because bonobos will even help strangers acquire out-of-reach food when no desirable social interaction is possible. However, this prosociality has its limitations because bonobos will not donate food in their possession when a social interaction is not possible. These results indicate that other-regarding preferences toward strangers are not uniquely human. Moreover, language, social norms, warfare and cooperative breeding are unnecessary for the evolution of xenophilic sharing. Instead, we propose that prosociality toward strangers initially evolves due to selection for social tolerance, allowing the expansion of individual social networks. Human social norms and language may subsequently extend this ape-like social preference to the most costly contexts.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 95 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 1,390 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Hungary 3 <1%
France 2 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 1377 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Librarian 1140 82%
Student > Ph. D. Student 49 4%
Student > Bachelor 42 3%
Researcher 41 3%
Student > Master 30 2%
Other 52 4%
Unknown 36 3%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Chemistry 1141 82%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 70 5%
Psychology 58 4%
Social Sciences 18 1%
Neuroscience 10 <1%
Other 48 3%
Unknown 45 3%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 318. 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
#108,764
of 25,840,929 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#1,714
of 225,329 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#589
of 291,396 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#24
of 4,794 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,840,929 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 225,329 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.9. 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 291,396 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 4,794 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.