ArticleJournal of the Royal Society, Interface2017
Modelling the spread of innovation in wild birds.
Article in Journal of the Royal Society, Interface, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cultural processes and demography: implications for conservation and beyond.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2025Article
- Copy the In-group: Group Membership Trumps Perceived Reliability, Warmth, and Competence in a Social-Learning Task.Psychological science · 2022Article
- Comparing fitness and drift explanations of Neanderthal replacement.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2019Article
- Modelling the spread of innovation in wild birds.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
We apply three plausible algorithms in agent-based computer simulations to recent experiments on social learning in wild birds. Although some of the phenomena are simulated by all three learning algorithms, several manifestations of social conformity bias are simulated by only the approximate majority (AM) algorithm, which has roots in chemistry, molecular biology and theoretical computer science. The simulations generate testable predictions and provide several explanatory insights into the diffusion of innovation through a population. The AM algorithm's success raises the possibility of its usefulness in studying group dynamics more generally, in several different scientific domains. Our differential-equation model matches simulation results and provides mathematical insights into the dynamics of these algorithms.
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.