↓ Skip to main content

Relative quantity judgments in South American sea lions (Otaria flavescens)

Overview of attention for article published in Animal Cognition, April 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Citations

dimensions_citation
49 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
92 Mendeley
citeulike
1 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
Relative quantity judgments in South American sea lions (Otaria flavescens)
Published in
Animal Cognition, April 2011
DOI 10.1007/s10071-011-0404-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

José Z. Abramson, Victoria Hernández-Lloreda, Josep Call, Fernando Colmenares

Abstract

There is accumulating evidence that a variety of species possess quantitative abilities although their cognitive substrate is still unclear. This study is the first to investigate whether sea lions (Otaria flavescens), in the absence of training, are able to assess and select the larger of two sets of quantities. In Experiment 1, the two sets of quantities were presented simultaneously as whole sets, that is, the subjects could compare them directly. In Experiment 2, the two sets of quantities were presented item-by-item, and the totality of items was never visually available at the time of choice. For each type of presentation, we analysed the effect of the ratio between quantities, the difference between quantities and the total number of items presented. The results showed that (1) sea lions can make relative quantity judgments successfully and (2) there is a predominant influence of the ratio between quantities on the subjects' performance. The latter supports the idea that an analogue representational mechanism is responsible for sea lions' relative quantities judgments. These findings are consistent with previous reports of relative quantities judgments in other species such as monkeys and apes and suggest that sea lions might share a similar mechanism to compare and represent quantities.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 92 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 4%
United Kingdom 2 2%
Mexico 2 2%
Netherlands 1 1%
South Africa 1 1%
Norway 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
Austria 1 1%
Unknown 79 86%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 27 29%
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 23%
Student > Master 14 15%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 7%
Student > Bachelor 4 4%
Other 11 12%
Unknown 9 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 47 51%
Psychology 20 22%
Environmental Science 3 3%
Social Sciences 3 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 2%
Other 2 2%
Unknown 15 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 November 2012.
All research outputs
#5,849,095
of 22,721,584 outputs
Outputs from Animal Cognition
#806
of 1,442 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,559
of 110,040 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Animal Cognition
#7
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,721,584 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,442 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.5. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 110,040 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its contemporaries.