MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2794400344 · doi:10.1093/beheco/arx194

Dominance and the initiation of group feeding events: the modifying effect of sociality

2017· article· en· W2794400344 on OpenAlexafffund
Julian Evans, Teri B. Jones, Julie Morand‐Ferron

Bibliographic record

VenueBehavioral Ecology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Behavior and Reproduction
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSocialityForagingBiologyDominance (genetics)CentralitySocial groupDominance hierarchySocial animalPersonalitySocial psychologyEcologyPsychologyAggression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Individuals can differ in how much they benefit from being in a group depending on characteristics such as their dominance rank or their behavior. Understanding which categories of individuals influence the decisions of a group could help understand which individuals are benefiting the most. We examine these ideas in wild flocks of black-capped chickadees (Poecile atricapillus), which feature stable group membership and linear dominance hierarchies. We attempt to infer which individuals are influencing group movement by examining how individuals initiate and join foraging events in relation to their dominance rank, exploratory personality type and position within a social network. We find that the influence of dominance on these behaviors heavily depends on the social connections an individual has, and that the effect of exploratory personality was small. Dominant individuals with a high eigenvector centrality were more likely to initiate a foraging event, whereas among individuals with a low eigenvector centrality this relationship was reversed, with subordinates being slightly more likely to initiate a foraging event. Analysis also suggested that individuals with a large number of strong social connections would be less affected by dominance than less social individuals. This suggests a system where individuals might adopt different foraging strategies depending on their position within a social network, and highlights the importance of individuals’ social phenotype when studying group decision-making.

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 score0.251
Threshold uncertainty score0.393

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 studies0.0010.000
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.266 · 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

Citations22
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBehavioral EcologySame topicAnimal Behavior and ReproductionFrench-language works237,207