MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1981239767 · doi:10.1037/cjep2006022

Social and hormonal bases of individual differences in the parental behaviour of birds and mammals.

2006· article· en· W1981239767 on OpenAlexafffund
Anne E. Storey, Krista M. Delahunty, Donald W. McKay, Carolyn J. Walsh, Sabina I. Wilhelm

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentale · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Behavior and Reproduction
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPaternal careProlactinAffect (linguistics)BiologyHormoneTestosterone (patch)Flexibility (engineering)CorticosteroneVariation (astronomy)Developmental psychologyPsychologyEndocrinologyGeneticsCommunicationPregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present an overview of research on how social experiences and hormonal responses affect individual variation in parental care of birds and mammals. The parental roles of prolactin and glucorticoids (corticosterone or cortisol) have many similarities in birds and in mammals. Prolactin may be involved in the initiation of parental interactions, with prolactin variation possibly explaining individual differences in parental decision-making. Glucocorticoid levels increase when parents have to work harder, with some individuals showing greater hormonal and behavioural responses than others. Testosterone interferes with paternal behaviour in birds, but its role is more complex and species-specific in male mammals. We examine these differences in an adaptive framework, where retaining flexibility of response has allowed individuals to respond differentially to social opportunities and environmental change.

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)0.001
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 score0.273
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations30
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentaleSame topicAnimal Behavior and ReproductionFrench-language works237,207