↓ Skip to main content

Social Facilitation of Cognition in Rhesus Monkeys: Audience Vs. Coaction

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Readers on

mendeley
56 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
Social Facilitation of Cognition in Rhesus Monkeys: Audience Vs. Coaction
Published in
Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, December 2015
DOI 10.3389/fnbeh.2015.00328
Pubmed ID
Authors

Amélie J. Reynaud, Carole Guedj, Fadila Hadj-Bouziane, Martine Meunier, Elisabetta Monfardini

Abstract

Social psychology has long established that the mere presence of a conspecific, be it an active co-performer (coaction effect), or a passive spectator (audience effect) changes behavior in humans. Yet, the process mediating this fundamental social influence has so far eluded us. Brain research and its nonhuman primate animal model, the rhesus macaque, could shed new light on this long debated issue. For this approach to be fruitful, however, we need to improve our patchy knowledge about social presence influence in rhesus macaques. Here, seven adults (two dyads and one triad) performed a simple cognitive task consisting in touching images to obtain food treats, alone vs. in presence of a co-performer or a spectator. As in humans, audience sufficed to enhance performance to the same magnitude as coaction. Effect sizes were however four times larger than those typically reported in humans in similar tasks. Both findings are an encouragement to pursue brain and behavior research in the rhesus macaque to help solve the riddle of social facilitation mechanisms.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 56 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 27%
Researcher 8 14%
Student > Bachelor 6 11%
Student > Master 5 9%
Student > Postgraduate 3 5%
Other 9 16%
Unknown 10 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 18 32%
Psychology 15 27%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 7%
Computer Science 1 2%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 14 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 02 December 2017.
All research outputs
#6,701,690
of 24,520,187 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
#1,016
of 3,365 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#98,834
of 397,512 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
#26
of 92 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,520,187 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,365 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 397,512 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 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 92 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 71% of its contemporaries.