↓ Skip to main content

Explorative Learning and Functional Inferences on a Five-Step Means-Means-End Problem in Goffin’s Cockatoos (Cacatua goffini)

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS ONE, July 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 (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
14 news outlets
blogs
7 blogs
twitter
42 tweeters
facebook
15 Facebook pages
googleplus
11 Google+ users
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
82 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.
Title
Explorative Learning and Functional Inferences on a Five-Step Means-Means-End Problem in Goffin’s Cockatoos (Cacatua goffini)
Published in
PLoS ONE, July 2013
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0068979
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alice M. I. Auersperg, Alex Kacelnik, Auguste M. P. von Bayern

Abstract

To investigate cognitive operations underlying sequential problem solving, we confronted ten Goffin's cockatoos with a baited box locked by five different inter-locking devices. Subjects were either naïve or had watched a conspecific demonstration, and either faced all devices at once or incrementally. One naïve subject solved the problem without demonstration and with all locks present within the first five sessions (each consisting of one trial of up to 20 minutes), while five others did so after social demonstrations or incremental experience. Performance was aided by species-specific traits including neophilia, a haptic modality and persistence. Most birds showed a ratchet-like progress, rarely failing to solve a stage once they had done it once. In most transfer tests subjects reacted flexibly and sensitively to alterations of the locks' sequencing and functionality, as expected from the presence of predictive inferences about mechanical interactions between the locks.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 42 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 82 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
Luxembourg 1 1%
Finland 1 1%
Japan 1 1%
France 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
Belgium 1 1%
Argentina 1 1%
Austria 1 1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 72 88%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 21 26%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 15%
Student > Bachelor 12 15%
Student > Master 11 13%
Other 8 10%
Other 18 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 38 46%
Psychology 15 18%
Computer Science 6 7%
Unspecified 6 7%
Social Sciences 4 5%
Other 13 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 210. 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 13 June 2017.
All research outputs
#50,579
of 12,089,123 outputs
Outputs from PLoS ONE
#1,156
of 132,972 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#561
of 137,727 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS ONE
#39
of 3,874 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,089,123 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 132,972 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.6. 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 137,727 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 3,874 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 98% of its contemporaries.