↓ Skip to main content

Honeybees can discriminate between Monet and Picasso paintings

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Comparative Physiology A: Neuroethology, Sensory, Neural & Behavioral Physiology, October 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#1 of 1,033)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
102 Mendeley
Title
Honeybees can discriminate between Monet and Picasso paintings
Published in
Journal of Comparative Physiology A: Neuroethology, Sensory, Neural & Behavioral Physiology, October 2012
DOI 10.1007/s00359-012-0767-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Wen Wu, Antonio M. Moreno, Jason M. Tangen, Judith Reinhard

Abstract

Honeybees (Apis mellifera) have remarkable visual learning and discrimination abilities that extend beyond learning simple colours, shapes or patterns. They can discriminate landscape scenes, types of flowers, and even human faces. This suggests that in spite of their small brain, honeybees have a highly developed capacity for processing complex visual information, comparable in many respects to vertebrates. Here, we investigated whether this capacity extends to complex images that humans distinguish on the basis of artistic style: Impressionist paintings by Monet and Cubist paintings by Picasso. We show that honeybees learned to simultaneously discriminate between five different Monet and Picasso paintings, and that they do not rely on luminance, colour, or spatial frequency information for discrimination. When presented with novel paintings of the same style, the bees even demonstrated some ability to generalize. This suggests that honeybees are able to discriminate Monet paintings from Picasso ones by extracting and learning the characteristic visual information inherent in each painting style. Our study further suggests that discrimination of artistic styles is not a higher cognitive function that is unique to humans, but simply due to the capacity of animals-from insects to humans-to extract and categorize the visual characteristics of complex images.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 66 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 102 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 8 8%
United States 4 4%
Australia 2 2%
Canada 2 2%
Portugal 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 84 82%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 25 25%
Researcher 25 25%
Student > Bachelor 15 15%
Student > Master 10 10%
Professor 6 6%
Other 21 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 54 53%
Psychology 13 13%
Neuroscience 10 10%
Unspecified 6 6%
Environmental Science 4 4%
Other 15 15%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 307. 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 12 April 2019.
All research outputs
#37,555
of 13,396,922 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Comparative Physiology A: Neuroethology, Sensory, Neural & Behavioral Physiology
#1
of 1,033 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#275
of 146,555 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Comparative Physiology A: Neuroethology, Sensory, Neural & Behavioral Physiology
#1
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,396,922 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 1,033 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 146,555 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 20 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 95% of its contemporaries.