↓ Skip to main content

The Dynamics of Honesty: Modelling the Growth of Costly, Sexually-Selected Ornaments

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS ONE, November 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (58th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
29 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The Dynamics of Honesty: Modelling the Growth of Costly, Sexually-Selected Ornaments
Published in
PLoS ONE, November 2011
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0027174
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sean A. Rands, Matthew R. Evans, Rufus A. Johnstone

Abstract

The handicap principle suggests that individuals of superior quality can more easily bear the cost of developing extravagant ornaments. Consequently, ornament size should provide reliable information about quality or condition. Previous models have largely ignored the process of ornament growth, focusing only on final ornament size. We model ornament growth schedules for individuals of different qualities, where higher quality individuals experience lower costs of carrying energy reserves of a given size, but where all individuals pay a net cost of carrying ornaments of a given size. If the costs of ornament production ensure that final ornament size reliably signals quality, the information conveyed by the signal can change dramatically during growth. Higher quality individuals should delay growth until closer to breeding. Taking a snapshot of partially developed ornaments prior to breeding would show them to be larger in poorer quality individuals. The claim that costly ornaments honestly signal quality thus needs to be understood in a dynamic context, and may only hold during some phases of growth.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 3%
United Kingdom 1 3%
United States 1 3%
Romania 1 3%
Netherlands 1 3%
Canada 1 3%
Unknown 23 79%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 28%
Student > Master 7 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 21%
Professor 2 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 7%
Other 4 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 22 76%
Unspecified 3 10%
Psychology 2 7%
Environmental Science 1 3%
Social Sciences 1 3%
Other 0 0%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 11 September 2014.
All research outputs
#6,526,554
of 12,091,105 outputs
Outputs from PLoS ONE
#60,620
of 133,011 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#82,990
of 210,142 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS ONE
#3,098
of 7,833 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,091,105 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 133,011 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% 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 210,142 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7,833 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 58% of its contemporaries.