↓ Skip to main content

Fathers are just as good as mothers at recognizing the cries of their baby

Overview of attention for article published in Nature Communications, April 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
7 news outlets
blogs
5 blogs
twitter
222 tweeters
facebook
17 Facebook pages
googleplus
3 Google+ users

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
65 Mendeley
Title
Fathers are just as good as mothers at recognizing the cries of their baby
Published in
Nature Communications, April 2013
DOI 10.1038/ncomms2713
Pubmed ID
Authors

Erik Gustafsson, Florence Levréro, David Reby, Nicolas Mathevon

Abstract

Previous investigations of parents' abilities to recognize the cries of their own babies have identified substantial and significant sex differences, with mothers showing greater correct recognition rates than fathers. Such sex differences in parenting abilities are common in non-human mammals and usually attributed to differential evolutionary pressures on male and female parental investment. However, in humans the traditional concept of 'maternal instinct' has received little empirical support and is incongruous given our evolutionary past as cooperative breeders. Here we use a controlled experimental design to show that both fathers and mothers can reliably and equally recognize their own baby from their cries, and that the only crucial factor affecting this ability is the amount of time spent by the parent with their own baby. These results highlight the importance of exposure and learning in the development of this ability, which may rely on shared auditory and cognitive abilities rather than sex-specific innate predispositions.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 222 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Hungary 2 3%
Germany 2 3%
France 1 2%
Austria 1 2%
United Kingdom 1 2%
Japan 1 2%
Unknown 57 88%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 28%
Researcher 15 23%
Student > Master 9 14%
Student > Bachelor 6 9%
Other 3 5%
Other 8 12%
Unknown 6 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 16 25%
Psychology 14 22%
Neuroscience 6 9%
Engineering 4 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 5%
Other 11 17%
Unknown 11 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 279. 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 11 February 2020.
All research outputs
#55,915
of 15,441,426 outputs
Outputs from Nature Communications
#758
of 29,296 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#374
of 119,740 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Communications
#1
of 100 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,441,426 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 29,296 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 48.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 119,740 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 100 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.