↓ Skip to main content

Individual personalities predict social behaviour in wild networks of great tits ( Parus major)

Overview of attention for article published in Ecology Letters, September 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
203 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
589 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
Title
Individual personalities predict social behaviour in wild networks of great tits ( Parus major)
Published in
Ecology Letters, September 2013
DOI 10.1111/ele.12181
Pubmed ID
Authors

L. M. Aplin, D. R. Farine, J. Morand-Ferron, E. F. Cole, A. Cockburn, B. C. Sheldon

Abstract

Social environments have an important effect on a range of ecological processes, and form a crucial component of selection. However, little is known of the link between personality, social behaviour and population structure. We combine a well-understood personality trait with large-scale social networks in wild songbirds, and show that personality underpins multiple aspects of social organisation. First, we demonstrate a relationship between network centrality and personality with 'proactive' (fast-exploring) individuals associating weakly with greater numbers of conspecifics and moving between flocks. Second, temporal stability of associations relates to personality: 'reactive' (slow-exploring) birds form synergistically stable relationships. Finally, we show that personality influences social structure, with males non-randomly distributed across groups. These results provide strong evidence that songbirds follow alternative social strategies related to personality. This has implications not only for the causes of social network structure but also for the strength and direction of selection on personality in natural populations.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 47 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 589 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 9 2%
United Kingdom 5 <1%
South Africa 3 <1%
Sweden 3 <1%
Germany 2 <1%
Switzerland 2 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Czechia 1 <1%
Other 4 <1%
Unknown 557 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 157 27%
Student > Master 106 18%
Student > Bachelor 89 15%
Researcher 89 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 25 4%
Other 68 12%
Unknown 55 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 389 66%
Environmental Science 48 8%
Psychology 21 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 2%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 6 1%
Other 33 6%
Unknown 83 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 134. 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 May 2020.
All research outputs
#160,545
of 16,400,352 outputs
Outputs from Ecology Letters
#57
of 2,452 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,651
of 170,042 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ecology Letters
#2
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,400,352 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,452 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 23.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 170,042 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.