The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The meaning and function of grunt variants in baboons
Open accessAbstract
Wild baboons Papio cynocephalus ursinus, give tonal, harmonically rich vocalizations, termed grunts, in at least two distinct, behavioural contexts: when about to embark on a move across an open area ('move' grunts); and when approaching mothers and attempting to inspect or handle their young infants ('infant' grunts). Grunts in these two contexts elicit different responses from receivers and appear to be acoustically distinct (Owren et al. 1997 Journal of the Acoustical Society of America101 2951-2963). Differences in responses to grunts in the two contexts may, then, be due to acoustic differences, reflecting at least a rudimentary capacity for referential signalling. Alternatively, responses may differ simply due to differences in the contexts in which the grunts are being produced. We conducted playback experiments to test between these hypotheses. Experiments were designed to control systematically the effects of both context and acoustic features so as to evaluate the role of each in determining responses to grunts. In playback trials, subjects differentiated between putative move and infant grunts. Their responses based only on the acoustic features of grunts were functionally distinct and mirrored their behaviour to naturally occurring move and infant grunts. However, subjects' responses were in some cases also affected by the context in which grunts were presented, and by an interaction between the context and the acoustic features of the grunts. Furthermore, responses to grunts were affected by the relative rank difference between the caller and the subject. These results indicate that baboon grunts can function in rudimentary referential fashion, but that the context in which grunts are produced and the social identity of callers can also affect recipients' responses. Copyright 1999 The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Observational study of behavior: sampling methods
Altmann, J. (1974) · Behaviour · doi:10.1163/156853974x00534 · Cited by 13,891
How Monkeys See the World: Inside the Mind of Another Species
Cheney, D. L., & Seyfarth, R. M. (1990) · doi:10.7208/chicago/9780226218526.001.0001 · Cited by 2,268
Self-citation
Cited by
Arbib, M. A. (2005) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x05000038 · Cited by 1,164
Vocal expression of emotions in mammals: mechanisms of production and evidence
Briefer, E. F. (2012) · Journal of Zoology · doi:10.1111/j.1469-7998.2012.00920.x · Cited by 541
The contribution of source–filter theory to mammal vocal communication research
Taylor, A. M., & Reby, D. (2010) · Journal of Zoology · doi:10.1111/j.1469-7998.2009.00661.x · Cited by 407
The Tuning of Human Neonates’ Preference for Speech
Vouloumanos, A., Hauser, M. D., Werker, J. F., & Martin, A. (2010) · Child Development · doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2009.01412.x · Cited by 254
The origin of meaning in animal signals
Seyfarth, R. M., & Cheney, D. L. (2017) · Animal Behaviour · doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2016.05.020 · Cited by 116
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- RENDALL, D., SEYFARTH, R. M., CHENEY, D. L., & OWREN, M. J.
- Venue
- Animal Behaviour
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1999-03
- Volume
- 57
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 583-592
- ISSN
- 0003-3472 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2118085180
- Cited by
- 205
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 12.28
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The meaning and function of grunt variants in baboons. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1006/anbe.1998.1031
- The paper
- RENDALL, D., SEYFARTH, R. M., CHENEY, D. L., & OWREN, M. J. (1999). The meaning and function of grunt variants in baboons. Animal Behaviour. https://doi.org/10.1006/anbe.1998.1031
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.