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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Spontaneous Innovation for Future Deception in a Male Chimpanzee
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, May 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0036782 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mathias Osvath, Elin Karvonen |
| Abstract |
The ability to invent means to deceive others, where the deception lies in the perceptually or contextually detached future, appears to require the coordination of sophisticated cognitive skills toward a single goal. Meanwhile innovation for a current situation has been observed in a wide range of species. Planning, on the one hand, and the social cognition required for deception on the other, have been linked to one another, both from a co-evolutionary and a neuroanatomical perspective. Innovation and deception have also been suggested to be connected in their nature of relying on novelty. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 153 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 25 | 16% |
| Chile | 5 | 3% |
| France | 3 | 2% |
| United States | 3 | 2% |
| Peru | 3 | 2% |
| Germany | 2 | 1% |
| Mexico | 2 | 1% |
| Colombia | 2 | 1% |
| Philippines | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 9 | 6% |
| Unknown | 98 | 64% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 135 | 88% |
| Scientists | 9 | 6% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 3% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 4 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 134 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 2 | 1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| Luxembourg | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 129 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 29 | 22% |
| Researcher | 20 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 20 | 15% |
| Professor | 16 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 13 | 10% |
| Other | 20 | 15% |
| Unknown | 16 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 43 | 32% |
| Psychology | 37 | 28% |
| Arts and Humanities | 10 | 7% |
| Philosophy | 5 | 4% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 18 | 13% |
| Unknown | 18 | 13% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 184. 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 26 August 2023.
All research outputs
#225,200
of 25,976,786 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#3,296
of 226,813 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#933
of 177,169 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#42
of 3,810 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,976,786 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 226,813 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 98% 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 177,169 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 3,810 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.