Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30607247›Full record

ReviewMovement ecology2018

Metrics for describing dyadic movement: a review.

Rocio Joo, Marie-Pierre Etienne, Nicolas Bez, Stéphanie Mahévas

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Movement ecology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Rocio Joo1Department of Wildlife Ecology and Conservation, Fort Lauderdale Research and Education Center, University of Florida, 3205 College Avenue, Davie, Florida, 33314 USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0319-4210
Marie-Pierre Etienne3Univ Rennes, Agrocampus Ouest, CNRS, IRMAR - UMR 6625, F-35000, Rennes, France.
Nicolas BezMARBEC, IRD, Ifremer, CNRS, Univ Montpellier, Sète, France.
Stéphanie Mahévas2IFREMER, Ecologie et Modèles pour l'Halieutique, BP 21105, Nantes Cedex 03, 44311 France.
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FRIfremer · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In movement ecology, the few works that have taken collective behaviour into account are data-driven and rely on simplistic theoretical assumptions, relying in metrics that may or may not be measuring what is intended. In the present paper, we focus on pairwise joint-movement behaviour, where individuals move together during at least a segment of their path. We investigate the adequacy of twelve metrics introduced in previous works for assessing joint movement by analysing their theoretical properties and confronting them with contrasting case scenarios. Two criteria are taken into account for review of those metrics: 1) practical use, and 2) dependence on parameters and underlying assumptions. When analysing the similarities between the metrics as defined, we show how some of them can be expressed using general mathematical forms. In addition, we evaluate the ability of each metric to assess specific aspects of joint-movement behaviour: proximity (closeness in space-time) and coordination (synchrony) in direction and speed. We found that some metrics are better suited to assess proximity and others are more sensitive to coordination. To help readers choose metrics, we elaborate a graphical representation of the metrics in the coordination and proximity space based on our results, and give a few examples of proximity and coordination focus in different movement studies.

Indexed as

Collective behaviourDyadic movementIndicesMovement ecologySpatio-temporal dynamicsTrajectories

Identifiers

PMID30607247
PMCPMC6307229
OpenAlexW2886547026

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.