↓ Skip to main content

Ravens attribute visual access to unseen competitors

Overview of attention for article published in Nature Communications, February 2016
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 (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
55 news outlets
blogs
13 blogs
twitter
272 tweeters
facebook
20 Facebook pages
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages
googleplus
30 Google+ users
reddit
3 Redditors

Citations

dimensions_citation
59 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
229 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Ravens attribute visual access to unseen competitors
Published in
Nature Communications, February 2016
DOI 10.1038/ncomms10506
Pubmed ID
Authors

Thomas Bugnyar, Stephan A. Reber, Cameron Buckner

Abstract

Recent studies purported to demonstrate that chimpanzees, monkeys and corvids possess a basic Theory of Mind, the ability to attribute mental states like seeing to others. However, these studies remain controversial because they share a common confound: the conspecific's line of gaze, which could serve as an associative cue. Here, we show that ravens Corvus corax take into account the visual access of others, even when they cannot see a conspecific. Specifically, we find that ravens guard their caches against discovery in response to the sounds of conspecifics when a peephole is open but not when it is closed. Our results suggest that ravens can generalize from their own perceptual experience to infer the possibility of being seen. These findings confirm and unite previous work, providing strong evidence that ravens are more than mere behaviour-readers.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 272 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 229 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 1%
Germany 3 1%
Canada 3 1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Czechia 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Romania 1 <1%
Other 2 <1%
Unknown 212 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 59 26%
Student > Bachelor 47 21%
Researcher 37 16%
Student > Master 26 11%
Student > Postgraduate 9 4%
Other 31 14%
Unknown 20 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 78 34%
Psychology 52 23%
Neuroscience 14 6%
Environmental Science 13 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 3%
Other 37 16%
Unknown 28 12%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 727. 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 16 February 2020.
All research outputs
#10,131
of 15,098,051 outputs
Outputs from Nature Communications
#174
of 28,398 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#281
of 341,899 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Communications
#1
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,098,051 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 28,398 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 48.5. 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 341,899 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 20 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 95% of its contemporaries.