↓ Skip to main content

From Sweeping to the Caress: Similarities and Discrepancies between Human and Non-Human Primates’ Pleasant Touch

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
58 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
From Sweeping to the Caress: Similarities and Discrepancies between Human and Non-Human Primates’ Pleasant Touch
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, September 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01371
Pubmed ID
Authors

Laura C Grandi

Abstract

Affective touch plays a key role in affiliative behavior, offering a mechanism for the formation and maintenance of social bonds among conspecifics, both in humans and non-human primates. Furthermore, it has been speculated that the CT fiber system is a specific coding channel for affiliative touch that occurs during skin-to-skin interactions with conspecifics. In humans, this touch is commonly referred to as the caress, and its correlation with the CT fiber system has been widely demonstrated. It has been hypothesized that the sweeping touch that occurs during grooming in non-human primates may modulate the CT fibers, with recent preliminary studies on rhesus monkeys supporting this hypothesis. The present mini-review proposes a comparison between the pleasant touch, caress and sweeping of humans and non-human primates, respectively. The currently available data was therefore reviewed regarding (i) the correlation between pleasant touch and CT fibers both in humans and non-human primates, (ii) the autonomic effects, (iii) the encoding at the central nervous system, (iv) the development from early life to adulthood, and (v) the potential applications of pleasant touch in the daily lives of both humans and non-human primates. Moreover, by considering both the similarities and discrepancies between the human caress and non-human primate sweeping, a possible evolutionary mechanism can be proposed that has developed from sweeping as a utilitarian action with affiliative meaning among monkeys, to the caress as a purely affective gesture associated with humans.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 58 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 19%
Student > Master 8 14%
Student > Bachelor 5 9%
Researcher 5 9%
Other 4 7%
Other 11 19%
Unknown 14 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 10 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 17%
Psychology 7 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 5%
Other 7 12%
Unknown 14 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 22 January 2020.
All research outputs
#6,734,241
of 22,884,315 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#9,564
of 29,985 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#103,931
of 332,531 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#182
of 404 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,884,315 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,985 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 332,531 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 404 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.