ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2019
Why are some personalities less plastic?
Article in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 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.
- Spider predatory aggressiveness exhibits diverse personality and plasticity associations and complex neurophysiological mechanisms.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Context-dependent trait covariances: how plasticity shapes behavioral syndromes.Behavioral ecology : official journal of the International Society for Behavioral EcologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Individuals from the same population typically show consistent differences in behavioural traits that are frequently associated with differences in contextual plasticity. Yet such a correlation might arise either because some individuals are better able than others to detect environmental changes or because the benefits of being plastic are condition-dependent. To discriminate between these two competing hypotheses, I developed an individual-based model that simulates a population in which individuals of varying fighting ability compete by pairwise interactions using either the fixed hawk (aggressive) or dove (peaceful) strategies or a conditional assessment strategy. As anticipated, the model predicts that only individuals with low (and/or intermediate) fighting ability should use the assessment strategy, giving rise to a negative (or dome-shaped) relationship between aggressiveness and plasticity. The proportion of plastic individuals, however, should be affected not only by the environmental conditions in which individuals live but also by the mechanism that would maintain variation in the traits that determine the benefits of plasticity. In particular, if individual differences in fighting ability may be eroded by natural selection, it predicts that ecological conditions that cause assortative interactions (e.g. high predation risks) would contribute in maintaining variation among individuals in their fighting ability, thereby favouring greater plasticity.
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.