ArticleScientific reports2026
Network analysis highlights socio-demographic patterns of stone tool-using primates.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
While the nutritional benefits and social learning of tool use in primates have been widely studied, far less is known about how tool use is associated with social life. We investigated the social aspects of tool use in a hybrid population of long-tailed macaques (Macaca fascicularis aurea × M. f. fascicularis) on Koram Island, Thailand, comprising both stone tool users and non-users. To assess potential socio-demographic patterns, we examined whether tool use differed between sexes and whether it was related to variation in dominance rank. Using social network analyses, we assessed whether tool users differed in their associations outside foraging contexts by analyzing their grooming interactions and positions within the grooming network. Males were more likely to use tools than females, whereas rank was unrelated to tool use. Tool users and non-users showed similar social connectivity, grooming rates, and numbers of grooming partners. However, grooming networks indicated that non-tool users preferentially associated with other non-users, whereas tool users showed no affiliative bias. By integrating individual characteristics with social network data, this study provides insight into how tool-use behavior integrates into primate social systems, particularly in populations with substantial variation in technological behavior.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.