Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32420858›Full record

ArticlePhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2020

The signal detection problem of aposematic prey revisited: integrating prior social and personal experience.

Liisa Hämäläinen, Rose Thorogood

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Signal detection, acceptance thresholds and the evolution of animal recognition systems.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2020
    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

2 authors.

Liisa HämäläinenDepartment of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Downing Street, Cambridge CB2 3EJ, UK.
Rose ThorogoodDepartment of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Downing Street, Cambridge CB2 3EJ, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ever since Alfred R. Wallace suggested brightly coloured, toxic insects warn predators about their unprofitability, evolutionary biologists have searched for an explanation of how these aposematic prey evolve and are maintained in natural populations. Understanding how predators learn about this widespread prey defence is fundamental to addressing the problem, yet individuals differ in their foraging decisions and the predominant application of associative learning theory largely ignores predators' foraging context. Here we revisit the suggestion made 15 years ago that signal detection theory provides a useful framework to model predator learning by emphasizing the integration of prior information into predation decisions. Using multiple experiments where we modified the availability of social information using video playback, we show that personal information (sampling aposematic prey) improves how predators (great tits,

Indexed as

LearningPredatory BehaviorAnimalsFemaleMaleSongbirdsaposematismpredator–prey interactionssignal detection theorysocial information use

Identifiers

PMID32420858
PMCPMC7331014

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.