↓ Skip to main content

Experimental evidence of contagious yawning in budgerigars (Melopsittacus undulatus)

Overview of attention for article published in Animal Cognition, May 2015
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 (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
14 news outlets
blogs
6 blogs
twitter
34 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages
googleplus
4 Google+ users

Citations

dimensions_citation
63 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
87 Mendeley
Title
Experimental evidence of contagious yawning in budgerigars (Melopsittacus undulatus)
Published in
Animal Cognition, May 2015
DOI 10.1007/s10071-015-0873-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrew C. Gallup, Lexington Swartwood, Janine Militello, Serena Sackett

Abstract

Experimental evidence of contagious yawning has only been documented in four mammalian species. Here, we report the results from two separate experimental studies designed to investigate the presence of contagious yawning in a social parrot, the budgerigar (Melopsittacus undulatus). In Study 1, birds were paired in adjacent cages with and without visual barriers, and the temporal association of yawning was assessed between visual conditions. In Study 2, the same birds were exposed to video stimuli of both conspecific yawns and control behavior, and yawning frequency was compared between conditions. Results from both studies demonstrate that yawning is contagious. To date, this is the first experimental evidence of contagious yawning in a non-mammalian species. We propose that future research could use budgerigars to explore questions related to basic forms of empathic processing.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 34 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 87 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Hungary 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
Austria 1 1%
Unknown 83 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 23%
Student > Bachelor 17 20%
Researcher 12 14%
Student > Master 8 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 7%
Other 7 8%
Unknown 17 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 27 31%
Psychology 13 15%
Neuroscience 5 6%
Environmental Science 3 3%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 3 3%
Other 8 9%
Unknown 28 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 173. 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 31 July 2022.
All research outputs
#230,358
of 25,252,667 outputs
Outputs from Animal Cognition
#70
of 1,551 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,349
of 272,907 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Animal Cognition
#4
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,252,667 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 1,551 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 36.2. 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 272,907 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 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.