↓ Skip to main content

Decision-making theories: linking the disparate research areas of individual and collective cognition

Overview of attention for article published in Animal Cognition, April 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
152 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
Title
Decision-making theories: linking the disparate research areas of individual and collective cognition
Published in
Animal Cognition, April 2013
DOI 10.1007/s10071-013-0631-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marie Pelé, Cédric Sueur

Abstract

In order to maximize their fitness, animals have to deal with different environmental and social factors that affect their everyday life. Although the way an animal behaves might enhance its fitness or survival in regard to one factor, it could compromise them regarding another. In the domain of decision sciences, research concerning decision making focuses on performances at the individual level but also at the collective one. However, between individual and collective decision making, different terms are used resulting in little or no connection between both research areas. In this paper, we reviewed how different branches of decision sciences study the same concept, mainly called speed-accuracy trade-off, and how the different results are on the same track in terms of showing the optimality of decisions. Whatever the level, individual or collective, each decision might be defined with three parameters: time or delay to decide, risk and accuracy. We strongly believe that more progress would be possible in this domain of research if these different branches were better linked, with an exchange of their results and theories. A growing amount of literature describes economics in humans and eco-ethology in birds making compromises between starvation, predation and reproduction. Numerous studies have been carried out on social cognition in primates but also birds and carnivores, and other publications describe market or reciprocal exchanges of commodities. We therefore hope that this paper will lead these different areas to a common decision science.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 152 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 1%
Germany 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Ghana 1 <1%
Unknown 145 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 38 25%
Researcher 22 14%
Student > Master 20 13%
Student > Bachelor 13 9%
Professor 8 5%
Other 29 19%
Unknown 22 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 68 45%
Psychology 13 9%
Environmental Science 9 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 7 5%
Social Sciences 7 5%
Other 17 11%
Unknown 31 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 February 2022.
All research outputs
#1,959,843
of 23,053,169 outputs
Outputs from Animal Cognition
#434
of 1,465 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,347
of 176,041 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Animal Cognition
#9
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,053,169 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,465 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 176,041 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.