ArticleBiology letters2019
Rational choice of social group size in mosquitofish.
Article in Biology letters, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Does the match between individual and group behavior matter in shoaling sticklebacks?Ecology and evolution · 2022Article
- Darwin, sexual selection, and the brain.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Choice of social group can affect the likelihood of survivorship and reproduction for social species. By joining larger social groups-shoals-small freshwater fish like the mosquitofish Gambusia affinis can reduce predation risk and forage more efficiently. We tested shoal choice in mosquitofish to determine whether such choices are economically rational, i.e. consistent and optimal. Although many studies of decision-making assume rational choice, irrational decision-making is common and occurs across contexts. We tested rationality of shoaling decisions by testing the constant ratio rule, which states that the relative preference for two options should not change in the presence of a third option. Female mosquitofish upheld this rule when tested for shoal preference based on group size. Our results contrast with other studies showing violations of the constant ratio rule in foraging and mate choice decision-making contexts. These results suggest that decisions that immediately influence survivorship or decision-making along a single dimension may favour rational decision-making.
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.