ReviewPhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2013
Taking note of Tinbergen, or: the promise of a biology of behaviour.
Review in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Physiological mechanisms underlying animal social behaviour.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2017Article
- Religion and morality.Psychological bulletin · 2015Review
- Eco-evo-devo of the lemur syndrome: did adaptive behavioral plasticity get canalized in a large primate radiation?Frontiers in zoology · 2015Review
- Father's brain is sensitive to childcare experiences.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2014Article
- Constraints and flexibility in mammalian social behaviour: introduction and synthesis.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2013Article
- Developmental constraints on behavioural flexibility.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2013Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this concluding paper, we revisit Tinbergen's 1963 article and assess its impact on the field of behavioural research in general, and the papers in this volume in particular. We show how Tinbergen's insistence that greater attention should be paid to studies of 'survival value' has yielded immense returns over the past 50 years, allowing an integrative biology of behaviour to emerge and thrive, and that his addition of ontogeny to the 'major problems of biology' was both insightful and prescient.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.