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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Basis for Cumulative Cultural Evolution in Chimpanzees: Social Learning of a More Efficient Tool-Use Technique
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, January 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0055768 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Shinya Yamamoto, Tatyana Humle, Masayuki Tanaka |
| Abstract |
The evidence for culture in non-human animals has been growing incrementally over the past two decades. However, the ability for cumulative cultural evolution, with successive generations building on earlier achievements, in non-human animals remains debated. Faithful social learning of incremental improvements in technique is considered to be a defining feature of human culture, differentiating human from non-human cultures. This study presents the first experimental evidence for chimpanzees' social transmission of a more efficient tool-use technique invented by a conspecific group member. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 34 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 7 | 21% |
| United Kingdom | 5 | 15% |
| Spain | 4 | 12% |
| Germany | 2 | 6% |
| Brazil | 2 | 6% |
| Hungary | 1 | 3% |
| France | 1 | 3% |
| Japan | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 11 | 32% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 27 | 79% |
| Scientists | 7 | 21% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 204 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 1% |
| Brazil | 2 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 193 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 45 | 22% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 36 | 18% |
| Researcher | 28 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 25 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 15 | 7% |
| Other | 27 | 13% |
| Unknown | 28 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 65 | 32% |
| Psychology | 48 | 24% |
| Social Sciences | 21 | 10% |
| Environmental Science | 5 | 2% |
| Linguistics | 4 | 2% |
| Other | 21 | 10% |
| Unknown | 40 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 61. 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 10 June 2015.
All research outputs
#714,577
of 25,888,937 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#9,477
of 225,822 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,440
of 292,951 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#198
of 5,029 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,888,937 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 225,822 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 95% 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 292,951 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,029 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 96% of its contemporaries.