MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1573333293

Relation between dominance rank, prior agonistic intensity and subsequent aggressive levels in winners and losers of dyads of male Green swordtail fish (Xiphophorus helleri)

2001· article· en· W1573333293 on OpenAlexafffund
Claude Goulet, Jacques P. Beaugrand

Bibliographic record

VenueCogPrints (University of Southampton) · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Behavior and Reproduction
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAgonistic behaviourVictoryAggressionPsychologyDominance hierarchySocial psychologyDominance (genetics)DyadDevelopmental psychologySocial relationDemographyBiologySociology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aggressive scores obtained in a mirror test 1h before an encounter were found to be a good predictor of victory in male Xiphophorus dyads showing less than 5% size differences. Out of 36 dyad members showing higher aggressive scores at pre-test, 28 obtained victory in the subsequent encounter. It was found that future winners were more aggressive than future losers to their own image in mirror tests before their encounter. Initial individual aggressive levels in mirror tests were also found to be a function of the rank the individuals occupied in their home hierarchies. The higher the rank, the higher was the individual aggressive level as measured by mirror pre-tests, as well as by post-tests. This relationship applied to future winners, as well as to future losers. The level of aggression reached during agonistic encounter was not a function of the social ranks the opponents occupied in their home hierarchies. Males in dyads composed of two omegas fought as fiercely as males in dyads of two alphas or two betas. No significant relationship was noted between the initial individual aggressive scores at mirror pre-test and the levels of aggression reached during encounters. We found in winners the existence of a significant correlation between the aggressive level they reached during agonistic encounter and a subsequent increase in aggressive levels at mirror tests 1h and 24h after victory. The more intense the agonistic encounter, the more important the subsequent increase in aggressive level in winners; an increase which was still detectable 24h after victory. However, prior alpha winners were apparently not as sensitive as prior betas and prior omegas to the aggressive level reached during the encounter since their mirror scores obtained after victory did not change when compared to their baseline at pre-test. After defeat, losers did not show any significant change in aggressive scores in mirror tests. Moreover, it was found that encounters in which a 1h resident met an intruder were in general less aggressive than encounters between two intruders. Experiential effects are discussed as instances of learning and generalisation. \n\n\n

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.101
Threshold uncertainty score0.372

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.181 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCogPrints (University of Southampton)Same topicAnimal Behavior and ReproductionFrench-language works237,207