↓ Skip to main content
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

44 news outlets
12 blogs
279 X users
12 Facebook pages
3 Wikipedia pages
2 Google+ users
1 YouTube creator


456 Dimensions

Readers on

688 Mendeley
5 CiteULike
Shared decision-making drives collective movement in wild baboons
Published in
Science, June 2015
DOI 10.1126/science.aaa5099
Pubmed ID

Ariana Strandburg-Peshkin, Damien R Farine, Iain D Couzin, Margaret C Crofoot


Conflicts of interest about where to go and what to do are a primary challenge of group living. However, it remains unclear how consensus is achieved in stable groups with stratified social relationships. Tracking wild baboons with a high-resolution global positioning system and analyzing their movements relative to one another reveals that a process of shared decision-making governs baboon movement. Rather than preferentially following dominant individuals, baboons are more likely to follow when multiple initiators agree. When conflicts arise over the direction of movement, baboons choose one direction over the other when the angle between them is large, but they compromise if it is not. These results are consistent with models of collective motion, suggesting that democratic collective action emerging from simple rules is widespread, even in complex, socially stratified societies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 279 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 688 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 9 1%
United Kingdom 3 <1%
Germany 2 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Senegal 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Israel 1 <1%
Other 9 1%
Unknown 658 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 156 23%
Researcher 109 16%
Student > Bachelor 78 11%
Student > Master 74 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 48 7%
Other 114 17%
Unknown 109 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 276 40%
Environmental Science 66 10%
Psychology 42 6%
Social Sciences 29 4%
Computer Science 24 3%
Other 108 16%
Unknown 143 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 601. 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 17 January 2024.
All research outputs
of 26,337,162 outputs
Outputs from Science
of 83,870 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 279,725 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science
of 1,375 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,337,162 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 83,870 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 66.6. 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 279,725 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 1,375 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.