The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Referential labelling in Diana monkeys
Open accessAbstract
Animal semantic communication has received considerable theoretical and empirical attention because of its relevance to human language. Advances have been made by studies of alarm-call behaviour in nonhumans. In monkeys, for example, there is evidence that recipients have a fairly sophisticated understanding of a call's meaning; that is, the predator type usually associated with a certain alarm call. Little is known, however, about the mental mechanisms that drive call production in nonhuman primates. In some nonprimate species, it has been found that signallers do not respond to a predator's physical features but instead seem to respond to its relative threat or direction of attack. In these species, therefore, alarm calls do not denote different predator categories but simply reflect different types or levels of danger. Because different predator categories typically impose different types and degrees of threat it is entirely possible that nonhuman primates also respond to threat rather than a predator's category. This study examined how wild Diana monkeys, Cercopithecus diana, of the Taï forest, Ivory Coast, label predation events. By altering playback stimuli and the position of a concealed speaker, I investigated whether Diana monkeys respond with acoustically different alarm calls depending on a predator's (1) distance (close versus far), (2) elevation (above versus below), or (3) category (eagle versus leopard). Analysis of male and female alarm-call behaviour showed that Diana monkeys consistently responded to predator category regardless of immediate threat or direction of attack. Data further suggested that, in addition to predator category, monkeys' alarm calls might also convey information about the predator's distance. Copyright 2000 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
The role of female diana monkeys, Cercopithecus diana, in territorial defence
Hill, C. M. (1994) · Animal Behaviour · doi:10.1006/anbe.1994.1056 · Cited by 30
Cited by
Fitch, W. T. (2010) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511817779 · Cited by 594
Rendall, D., Owren, M. J., & Ryan, M. J. (2009) · Animal Behaviour · doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2009.06.007 · Cited by 417
Visitor-associated variation in captive Diana monkey (Cercopithecus diana diana) behaviour
Todd, P. A., Macdonald, C., & Coleman, D. (2007) · Applied Animal Behaviour Science · doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2006.09.010 · Cited by 41
Within-group differences in captive Diana monkey (Cercopithecus diana diana) behaviour
Todd, P. A., Macdonald, C., & Coleman, D. (2008) · Journal of Ethology · doi:10.1007/s10164-007-0059-7 · Cited by 10
Metadata
- Authors
- Zuberbühler, K.
- Venue
- Animal Behaviour
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2000-05
- Volume
- 59
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 917-927
- ISSN
- 0003-3472 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2050305129
- Cited by
- 348
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 11.90
- 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: Referential labelling in Diana monkeys. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1006/anbe.1999.1317
- The paper
- Zuberbühler, K. (2000). Referential labelling in Diana monkeys. Animal Behaviour. https://doi.org/10.1006/anbe.1999.1317
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.