Bibliometric investigation of the integration of animal personality in conservation contexts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Consistent individual differences in behavior, commonly termed animal personality, are a widespread phenomenon across taxa that have important consequences for fitness, natural selection, and trophic interactions. Animal personality research may prove useful in several conservation contexts, but which contexts remains to be determined. We conducted a structured literature review of 654 studies identified by combining search terms for animal personality and various conservation subfields. We scored the relevance of personality and conservation issues for each study to identify which studies meaningfully integrated the 2 fields as opposed to surface-level connections or vague allusions. We found a taxonomic bias toward mammals (29% of all studies). Very few amphibian or reptile studies applied personality research to conservation issues (6% each). Climate change (21%), invasive species (15%), and captive breeding and reintroduction (13%) were the most abundant conservation subfields that occurred in our search, though a substantial proportion of these papers weakly integrated conservation and animal personality (climate change 54%, invasive species 51%, captive breeding and reintroduction 40%). Based on our results, we recommend that researchers strive for consistent and broadly applicable terminology when describing consistent behavioral differences to minimize confusion and improve the searchability of research. We identify several gaps in the literature that appear to be promising and fruitful avenues for future research, such as disease transmission as a function of sociability or exploration as a driver of space use in protected areas. Practitioners can begin informing future conservation efforts with knowledge gained from animal personality research.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.020 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".