ArticleDie Naturwissenschaften2017
Social media and scientific research are complementary-YouTube and shrikes as a case study.
Article in Die Naturwissenschaften, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Faeces, Feathers and Flight: Understanding of Escape Behaviour in Incubating Eurasian Woodcocks (Ecology and evolution · 2025Article
- Kleptoparasitism and Coexistence: Resource Competition Between Indian Leopards and Striped Hyenas.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Article
- Leveraging social media and other online data to study animal behavior.PLoS biology · 2024Article
- Poor Welfare Indicators and Husbandry Practices at Lion (Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2022Article
- Viewing the rare through public lenses: insights into dead calf carrying and other thanatological responses in Asian elephants using YouTube videos.Royal Society open science · 2022Article
- Current Societal Views about Sustainable Wildlife Management and Conservation: A Survey of College Students in China.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2020Article
- Interspecific Aggressions between Crested Porcupines and Roe Deer.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2020Article
- Birds Drinking Alcohol: Species and Relationship with People. A Review of Information from Scientific Literature and Social Media.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2020Review
- Investigating the welfare and conservation implications of alligator wrestling for American Alligators (Alligator mississippiensis).PloS one · 2020Article
- Number of syllables in cuckoo Cuculus canorus calls: A test using a citizen science project.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Fascination with animals and their behaviour is one the most prominent patterns persisting in all human cultures. During the last decades, however, technological development and public access to the Internet have increased the speed and the extent of information sharing at an unprecedented rate, in some cases even challenging the traditional methods used in science. In order to understand the extent of this influence, we focused on the behaviour of shrikes. Shrikes are an enigmatic group of songbirds with a unique behaviour of impaling prey. We employed an extensive Internet search on YouTube (YT), a very popular and increasingly important source of information worldwide, for videos recording shrikes. Our analyses revealed that the number of shrike videos on YT is strongly positively correlated with classical knowledge on shrikes from books and scientific articles. Our results also suggest that in some cases YT may provide an alternative source of information on shrike ecology and behaviour. YT videos may thus provide new insights into the study of certain species or subjects and help identify gaps in ecological studies, especially in poorly studied species.
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.