↓ Skip to main content

Shared decision-making drives collective movement in wild baboons

Overview of attention for article published in Science, June 2015
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
28 news outlets
blogs
10 blogs
twitter
333 tweeters
facebook
12 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
googleplus
2 Google+ users
video
1 video uploader

Readers on

mendeley
313 Mendeley
citeulike
4 CiteULike
Title
Shared decision-making drives collective movement in wild baboons
Published in
Science, June 2015
DOI 10.1126/science.aaa5099
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ariana Strandburg-Peshkin, Damien R. Farine, Iain D. Couzin, Margaret C. Crofoot, Strandburg-Peshkin, Ariana, Farine, Damien R, Couzin, Iain D, Crofoot, Margaret C, A. Strandburg-Peshkin, D. R. Farine, I. D. Couzin, M. C. Crofoot

Abstract

Conflicts of interest about where to go and what to do are a primary challenge of group living. However, it remains unclear how consensus is achieved in stable groups with stratified social relationships. Tracking wild baboons with a high-resolution global positioning system and analyzing their movements relative to one another reveals that a process of shared decision-making governs baboon movement. Rather than preferentially following dominant individuals, baboons are more likely to follow when multiple initiators agree. When conflicts arise over the direction of movement, baboons choose one direction over the other when the angle between them is large, but they compromise if it is not. These results are consistent with models of collective motion, suggesting that democratic collective action emerging from simple rules is widespread, even in complex, socially stratified societies.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 333 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 313 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 10 3%
Germany 5 2%
United Kingdom 4 1%
France 2 <1%
Mexico 2 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
China 2 <1%
Japan 2 <1%
Estonia 1 <1%
Other 13 4%
Unknown 270 86%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 80 26%
Researcher 73 23%
Student > Master 44 14%
Student > Bachelor 32 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 22 7%
Other 61 19%
Unknown 1 <1%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 163 52%
Environmental Science 30 10%
Psychology 24 8%
Unspecified 18 6%
Computer Science 16 5%
Other 61 19%
Unknown 1 <1%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 519. 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 04 October 2017.
All research outputs
#8,965
of 8,944,500 outputs
Outputs from Science
#421
of 43,272 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#272
of 230,812 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science
#16
of 806 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 8,944,500 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 43,272 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.0. 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 230,812 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 806 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.