This study analyzes the accuracy of anecdotes cited in behavioral primatology publications. Anecdotes (n=1 cases) recounting tool use were sought in the four main primatological journals. Citations of anecdotes in the scientific literature that met three criteria were systematically coded for recognition and accuracy. The results showed that 60% of the time, authors who cited anecdotes did not explicitly acknowledge them as such. To a lesser extent, the citations exaggerated the frequency of anecdotal events or misrepresented their status. For tool use specifically, the actor was misreported more often than the tool or its target. Multiple citations were incorrect more often than single citations. Overall, it seems that citation of anecdotes is problematic and may have far-reaching implications in terms of misleading overgeneralizations. Primatologists should take care in citing singular or rare events.
Copyright (c) 2005 Wiley-Liss, Inc.