Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28791151›Full record

ArticleRoyal Society open science2017

Group choices seemingly at odds with individual preferences.

Michel-Olivier Laurent Salazar, Stamatios C Nicolis, Mariano Calvo Martín, Grégory Sempo, Jean-Louis Deneubourg, Isaac Planas-Sitjà

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Royal Society open science, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Michel-Olivier Laurent SalazarUnit of Social Ecology, CP 231, Université libre de Bruxelles, Campus Plaine, Boulevard du Triomphe, Building NO Level 5, Brussels, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0003-3711-9681
Stamatios C NicolisUnit of Social Ecology, CP 231, Université libre de Bruxelles, Campus Plaine, Boulevard du Triomphe, Building NO Level 5, Brussels, Belgium.
Mariano Calvo MartínUnit of Social Ecology, CP 231, Université libre de Bruxelles, Campus Plaine, Boulevard du Triomphe, Building NO Level 5, Brussels, Belgium.
Grégory SempoUnit of Social Ecology, CP 231, Université libre de Bruxelles, Campus Plaine, Boulevard du Triomphe, Building NO Level 5, Brussels, Belgium.
Jean-Louis DeneubourgUnit of Social Ecology, CP 231, Université libre de Bruxelles, Campus Plaine, Boulevard du Triomphe, Building NO Level 5, Brussels, Belgium.
Isaac Planas-SitjàUnit of Social Ecology, CP 231, Université libre de Bruxelles, Campus Plaine, Boulevard du Triomphe, Building NO Level 5, Brussels, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0003-4041-6687

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Numerous studies have focused on the influence of the social environment and the interactions between individuals on the collective decision-making of groups. They showed, for example, that attraction between individuals is at the origin of an amplification of individual preferences. These preferences may concern various environmental cues such as biomolecules that convey information about the environment such as vanillin, which, for some insects, is an attractant. In this study, we analysed how the social context of the cockroaches of the species

Indexed as

cockroachescollective choicegroup preferenceindividual preferencessocial contextvanillin

Identifiers

PMID28791151
PMCPMC5541546

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.