↓ Skip to main content

Food begging and sharing in wild bonobos (Pan paniscus): assessing relationship quality?

Overview of attention for article published in Primates, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
15 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
87 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
Food begging and sharing in wild bonobos (Pan paniscus): assessing relationship quality?
Published in
Primates, March 2016
DOI 10.1007/s10329-016-0522-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lucas G. Goldstone, Volker Sommer, Niina Nurmi, Colleen Stephens, Barbara Fruth

Abstract

Food transfers are often hypothesised to have played a role in the evolution of cooperation amongst humans. However, they also occur in non-human primates, though no consensus exists regarding their function(s). We document patterns of begging for food and success rates as well as associated factors that may influence them for wild bonobos at LuiKotale, Democratic Republic of Congo. Our data, collected over 1074 observation hours, focus on 260 begging events (outside mother-offspring dyads) of which 37 % were successful. We find no support for the "reciprocity hypothesis"-that food is exchanged for grooming and/or sexual benefits; and only weak support for the "sharing under pressure" hypothesis-that food is transferred as a result of harassment and pays off in terms of nutritional benefits for the beggar. Instead, our data support the "assessing-relationships" hypothesis, according to which beggars gain information about the status of their social relationship with the possessor of a food item. This seems to hold particularly true for the frequent, albeit unsuccessful begging events by young females (newly immigrated or hierarchically non-established) towards adult females, although it can be observed in other dyadic combinations independent of sex and age.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 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 87 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 2%
Germany 2 2%
Unknown 83 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 26%
Student > Bachelor 17 20%
Researcher 10 11%
Student > Master 8 9%
Student > Postgraduate 7 8%
Other 9 10%
Unknown 13 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 34 39%
Environmental Science 9 10%
Social Sciences 8 9%
Psychology 7 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 5%
Other 9 10%
Unknown 16 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 15 December 2017.
All research outputs
#4,036,603
of 24,189,858 outputs
Outputs from Primates
#252
of 1,043 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#60,673
of 305,044 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Primates
#7
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,189,858 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,043 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 305,044 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 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 68% of its contemporaries.