↓ Skip to main content

Assessing personality in San Joaquin kit fox in situ: efficacy of field-based experimental methods and implications for conservation management

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Ethology, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
84 Mendeley
Title
Assessing personality in San Joaquin kit fox in situ: efficacy of field-based experimental methods and implications for conservation management
Published in
Journal of Ethology, September 2017
DOI 10.1007/s10164-017-0525-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Samantha Bremner-Harrison, Brian L. Cypher, Christine Van Horn Job, Stephen W. R. Harrison

Abstract

Utilisation of animal personality has potential benefit for conservation management. Due to logistics of robust behavioural evaluation in situ, the majority of studies on wild animals involve taking animals into captivity for testing, potentially compromising results. Three in situ tests for evaluation of boldness in San Joaquin kit fox (Vulpes macrotis mutica) were developed (ENOT: extended novel object test; RNOT: rapid novel object test; TH: trap/handling test). Each test successfully identified variation in boldness within its target age class(es). The TH test was suitable for use across all age classes. Tests were assessed for in situ suitability and for quantity/quality of data yielded. ENOT was rated as requiring high levels of time, cost and labour with greater likelihood of failure. However, it was rated highly for data quantity/quality. The TH test was rated as requiring little time, labour and cost, but yielding lower quality data. RNOT was rated in the middle. Each test had merit and could be adapted to suit project or species constraints. We recommend field-based evaluation of personality, reducing removal of animals from the wild and facilitating routine incorporation of personality assessment into conservation projects.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users 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 84 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 84 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 25 30%
Student > Bachelor 13 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 12%
Researcher 9 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 8%
Other 9 11%
Unknown 11 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 37 44%
Environmental Science 19 23%
Psychology 4 5%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 2%
Computer Science 1 1%
Other 3 4%
Unknown 18 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 03 January 2018.
All research outputs
#13,927,242
of 23,859,750 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Ethology
#290
of 524 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#158,185
of 318,574 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Ethology
#5
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,859,750 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 524 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 318,574 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.