↓ Skip to main content

Key Factors for the Emergence of Collective Decision in Invertebrates

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroscience, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Readers on

mendeley
137 Mendeley
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
Key Factors for the Emergence of Collective Decision in Invertebrates
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroscience, January 2012
DOI 10.3389/fnins.2012.00121
Pubmed ID
Authors

Raphaël Jeanson, Audrey Dussutour, Vincent Fourcassié

Abstract

In many species of group living invertebrates, in particular arthropods, collective decisions can emerge from the combined actions of individuals and the direct or indirect interactions between individuals. These decisions allow groups of individuals to respond quickly and accurately to changes that occur in their environment. Examples of such decisions are found in a variety of invertebrate taxa and in many different contexts, e.g., exploring a new territory, foraging for food, finding a suitable location where to aggregate or to establish a nest, defending oneself against predators, etc. In this paper we review the collective decisions that have been documented in different invertebrate taxa where individuals are known to live temporarily or permanently in social or gregarious groups. We first present some simple examples of collective decisions involving the choice between two alternatives. We then define the fundamental rules required for these collective decisions to emerge throughout the invertebrate taxon, from simple organisms such as caterpillars, to animals endowed with highly developed perceptive and cognitive capacities such as ants and bees. The presentation of these rules gives us the opportunity to illustrate one of the pitfalls of the study of collective choice in animals by showing through computer simulations how a choice between two alternatives can be misinterpreted as the result of the action of self-organized mechanisms. In the second part, we discuss the peculiarities of collective decisions in invertebrates, their properties, and characteristics. We conclude by discussing the issue of individual complexity in collective decision-making process.

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 137 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 4%
Portugal 2 1%
France 2 1%
Germany 2 1%
Argentina 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 124 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 18%
Researcher 23 17%
Student > Master 22 16%
Student > Bachelor 10 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 8 6%
Other 22 16%
Unknown 28 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 62 45%
Environmental Science 9 7%
Psychology 8 6%
Neuroscience 7 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 3%
Other 15 11%
Unknown 32 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 29 January 2017.
All research outputs
#8,418,069
of 25,759,158 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#5,328
of 11,707 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#71,637
of 251,832 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#71
of 154 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,759,158 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,707 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 251,832 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 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 154 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 52% of its contemporaries.