↓ Skip to main content

How does cognition shape social relationships?

Overview of attention for article published in Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, August 2018
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 (86th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
28 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
51 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
238 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
How does cognition shape social relationships?
Published in
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, August 2018
DOI 10.1098/rstb.2017.0293
Pubmed ID
Authors

Claudia A. F. Wascher, Ipek G. Kulahci, Ellis J. G. Langley, Rachael C. Shaw

Abstract

The requirements of living in social groups, and forming and maintaining social relationships are hypothesized to be one of the major drivers behind the evolution of cognitive abilities. Most empirical studies investigating the relationships between sociality and cognition compare cognitive performance between species living in systems that differ in social complexity. In this review, we ask whether and how individuals benefit from cognitive skills in their social interactions. Cognitive abilities, such as perception, attention, learning, memory, and inhibitory control, aid in forming and maintaining social relationships. We investigate whether there is evidence that individual variation in these abilities influences individual variation in social relationships. We then consider the evolutionary consequences of the interaction between sociality and cognitive ability to address whether bi-directional relationships exist between the two, such that cognition can both shape and be shaped by social interactions and the social environment. In doing so, we suggest that social network analysis is emerging as a powerful tool that can be used to test for directional causal relationships between sociality and cognition. Overall, our review highlights the importance of investigating individual variation in cognition to understand how it shapes the patterns of social relationships.This article is part of the theme issue 'Causes and consequences of individual differences in cognitive abilities'.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 28 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 238 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 238 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 58 24%
Student > Master 38 16%
Researcher 29 12%
Student > Bachelor 21 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 5%
Other 30 13%
Unknown 49 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 95 40%
Psychology 33 14%
Environmental Science 13 5%
Social Sciences 6 3%
Neuroscience 5 2%
Other 25 11%
Unknown 61 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 11 October 2021.
All research outputs
#2,415,238
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
#2,009
of 7,097 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#47,588
of 341,279 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
#40
of 103 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,097 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 24.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 341,279 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 103 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 61% of its contemporaries.