MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W597819923 · doi:10.1163/1568539x-00003279

Changes in wild red squirrel personality across ontogeny: activity and aggression regress towards the mean

2015· article· en· W597819923 on OpenAlexaff
Amanda D. Kelley, M. M. Humphries, Andrew G. McAdam, Stan Boutin

Bibliographic record

VenueBehaviour · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAnimal Ecology and Behavior Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversity of GuelphUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAggressionOntogenyPersonalityJuvenilePsychologyPopulationDevelopmental psychologyEcologyBiologySocial psychologyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Both juvenile and adult animals display stable behavioural differences (personality), but lifestyles and niches may change as animals mature, raising the question of whether personality changes across ontogeny. Here, we use a wild population of red squirrels to examine changes in activity and aggression from juvenile to yearling life stages. Personality may change at the individual level (individual stability), population level (mean level stability), and relative to other individuals (differential stability). We calculated all three types of stability, as well as the structural stability of the activity–aggression behavioural syndrome. Within individuals, both activity and aggression scores regressed towards the mean. Differential stability was maintained for activity, but not aggression. Structural stability was maintained; however, the activity–aggression correlation increased in squirrels that gained territories later in the season. These results suggest that personality undergoes some changes as animals mature, and that the ontogeny of personality can be linked to environmental changes.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations42
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBehaviourSame topicAnimal Ecology and Behavior StudiesFrench-language works237,207