| Title |
Ravens notice dominance reversals among conspecifics within and outside their social group
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nature Communications, April 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1038/ncomms4679 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jorg J. M. Massen, Andrius Pašukonis, Judith Schmidt, Thomas Bugnyar |
| Abstract |
A core feature of social intelligence is the understanding of third-party relations, which has been experimentally demonstrated in primates. Whether other social animals also have this capacity, and whether they can use this capacity flexibly to, for example, also assess the relations of neighbouring conspecifics, remains unknown. Here we show that ravens react differently to playbacks of dominance interactions that either confirm or violate the current rank hierarchy of members in their own social group and of ravens in a neighbouring group. Therefore, ravens understand third-party relations and may deduce those not only via physical interactions but also by observation. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 57 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 12 | 21% |
| United States | 8 | 14% |
| Germany | 4 | 7% |
| Netherlands | 3 | 5% |
| Japan | 2 | 4% |
| Canada | 2 | 4% |
| Finland | 1 | 2% |
| Belgium | 1 | 2% |
| Colombia | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Unknown | 20 | 35% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 43 | 75% |
| Scientists | 8 | 14% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 4 | 7% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 239 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 1% |
| Austria | 3 | 1% |
| Hungary | 2 | <1% |
| Germany | 2 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 2 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| Czechia | 1 | <1% |
| Israel | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 2 | <1% |
| Unknown | 221 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 45 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 42 | 18% |
| Researcher | 39 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 37 | 15% |
| Other | 11 | 5% |
| Other | 35 | 15% |
| Unknown | 30 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 104 | 44% |
| Psychology | 33 | 14% |
| Neuroscience | 14 | 6% |
| Environmental Science | 14 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 9 | 4% |
| Other | 25 | 10% |
| Unknown | 40 | 17% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 224. 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 01 April 2021.
All research outputs
#173,391
of 25,623,883 outputs
Outputs from Nature Communications
#2,458
of 57,849 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,345
of 242,084 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Communications
#19
of 535 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,623,883 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 57,849 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 55.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 242,084 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 535 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 96% of its contemporaries.