Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37788700›Full record

ReviewProceedings. Biological sciences2023

When less is more: coy display behaviours and the temporal dynamics of animal courtship.

Thomas MacGillavry, Giovanni Spezie, Leonida Fusani

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

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

3 authors.

Thomas MacGillavryKonrad Lorenz Institute of Ethology, University of Veterinary Medicine, Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-2298-6670
Giovanni SpezieKonrad Lorenz Institute of Ethology, University of Veterinary Medicine, Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-0590-6456
Leonida FusaniKonrad Lorenz Institute of Ethology, University of Veterinary Medicine, Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0001-8900-796X

Funding

Austrian Science Fund FWF W 1262
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sexual selection research has been dominated by the notion that mate choice selects for the most vigorous displays that best reflect the quality of the courter. However, courtship displays are often temporally structured, containing different elements with varying degrees of intensity and conspicuousness. For example, highly intense movements are often coupled with more subtle components such as static postures or hiding displays. Here, we refer to such subtle display traits as 'coy', as they involve the withholding of information about maximal display capabilities. We examine the role of intensity variation within temporally dynamic displays, and discuss three hypotheses for the evolution of coy courtship behaviours. We first review the threat reduction hypothesis, which points to sexual coercion and sexual autonomy as important facets of sexual selection. We then suggest that variation in display magnitude exploits pre-existing perceptual biases for temporal contrast. Lastly, we propose that information withholding may leverage receivers' predispositions for filling gaps in information-the 'curiosity bias'. Overall, our goal is to draw attention to temporal variation in display magnitude, and to advocate possible scenarios for the evolution of courtship traits that regularly occur below performance maxima. Throughout, we highlight novel directions for empirical and theoretical investigations.

Indexed as

CourtshipMating Preference, AnimalAnimalsPhenotypeSexual Behavior, AnimalSexual SelectionSocial Behaviorcourtshipcuriosityperceptual biassexual autonomysexual coerciontemporal dynamics

Identifiers

PMID37788700
PMCPMC10547558

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.