↓ Skip to main content

Individual Variation in Contagious Yawning Susceptibility Is Highly Stable and Largely Unexplained by Empathy or Other Known Factors

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, March 2014
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
39 news outlets
blogs
6 blogs
twitter
52 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user
video
2 YouTube creators

Citations

dimensions_citation
44 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
136 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
Individual Variation in Contagious Yawning Susceptibility Is Highly Stable and Largely Unexplained by Empathy or Other Known Factors
Published in
PLOS ONE, March 2014
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0091773
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alex J. Bartholomew, Elizabeth T. Cirulli

Abstract

The contagious aspect of yawning is a well-known phenomenon that exhibits variation in the human population. Despite the observed variation, few studies have addressed its intra-individual reliability or the factors modulating differences in the susceptibility of healthy volunteers. Due to its obvious biological basis and impairment in diseases like autism and schizophrenia, a better understanding of this trait could lead to novel insights into these conditions and the general biological functioning of humans. We administered 328 participants a 3-minute yawning video stimulus, a cognitive battery, and a comprehensive questionnaire that included measures of empathy, emotional contagion, circadian energy rhythms, and sleepiness. Individual contagious yawning measurements were found to be highly stable across testing sessions, both in a lab setting and if administered remotely online, confirming that certain healthy individuals are less susceptible to contagious yawns than are others. Additionally, most individuals who failed to contagiously yawn in our study were not simply suppressing their reaction, as they reported not even feeling like yawning in response to the stimulus. In contrast to previous studies indicating that empathy, time of day, or intelligence may influence contagious yawning susceptibility, we found no influence of these variables once accounting for the age of the participant. Participants were less likely to show contagious yawning as their age increased, even when restricting to ages of less than 40 years. However, age was only able to explain 8% of the variability in the contagious yawn response. The vast majority of the variability in this extremely stable trait remained unexplained, suggesting that studies of its inheritance are warranted.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 52 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 136 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Unknown 133 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 28 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 15%
Researcher 19 14%
Student > Master 14 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 9%
Other 20 15%
Unknown 22 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 53 39%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 16 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 10%
Neuroscience 6 4%
Computer Science 3 2%
Other 16 12%
Unknown 28 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 393. 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 28 June 2021.
All research outputs
#79,390
of 25,874,560 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#1,316
of 225,659 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#554
of 236,789 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#41
of 5,673 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,874,560 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 225,659 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 236,789 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 5,673 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.