MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1993413842 · doi:10.1037/a0020547

To whom the play signal is directed: A study of headshaking in black-handed spider monkeys (Ateles geoffroyi).

2011· article· en· W1993413842 on OpenAlexafffund
Sergio M. Pellis, Vivien C. Pellis

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of comparative psychology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPrimate Behavior and Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSpiderJuvenilePsychologyDevelopmental psychologyZoologyBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Spider monkeys shake their heads so as to facilitate amicable social contact. This occurs frequently during vigorous play fighting, and so is common during the juvenile period. Occasionally, juvenile spider monkeys use headshakes during nonsocial locomotor play. In this study, head shaking in early infancy and in adulthood was studied in a captive troop of spider monkeys, with a total of 8 infants studied from shortly after birth to just before weaning. Three hypotheses to account for these nonsocial headshakes were tested. The play as the experience of the unexpected hypothesis was found wanting because nonsocial headshakes were most common in early infancy, before the onset of the juvenile peak in play. The immature misdirection of signals hypothesis was also found wanting because the headshakes were correctly directed at other monkeys, but not at inanimate objects that were grabbed and mouthed. Both also failed to predict the occurrence of the observed nonsocial headshakes in adults. The hypothesis best supported by the data is that, under some situations, headshakes are self-directed to promote action when confronting contexts of uncertainty.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.171
GPT teacher head0.436
Teacher spread0.265 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations30
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of comparative psychologySame topicPrimate Behavior and EcologyFrench-language works237,207