Assessing Short‐ and Long‐Term Repeatability and Stability of Personality in Captive Zebra Finches Using Longitudinal Data
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Assessing behavioural consistency is crucial to understand the evolution of personality traits. In the present study, we examined the short‐ and long‐term repeatability and stability of two unrelated personality traits – exploratory tendencies and struggling rate – using captive female zebra finches ( T aeniopygia guttata ). We performed two experimental sessions of behavioural tests with a 7‐mo interval, which represents up to one quarter of a zebra finch's life expectancy. We showed that, overall, exploratory tendencies and struggling rate were significantly repeatable in the short term. However, only exploratory tendencies were repeatable in the long term. We found interindividual differences in short‐term stability of exploratory tendencies, but not struggling rate, providing evidence for differences in intraindividual variability. In the long term, struggling rate significantly decreased between the two experimental sessions, whereas exploratory tendencies remained stable. Finally, the amount of interindividual variation measured at both sessions did not differ. Our results suggest that short‐ and long‐term repeatability and stability of personality may vary between individuals, depending on the behavioural trait under scrutiny. As a consequence, deducing personality from measures realized earlier in a subject's life should be performed with caution. We discuss the implications of inter‐ and intraindividual variation in personality consistency on individual fitness.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it