Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38560618›Full record

ReviewBioscience2024

Individualized social niches in animals: Theoretical clarifications and processes of niche change.

Marie I Kaiser, Jürgen Gadau, Sylvia Kaiser, Caroline Müller, S Helene Richter

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Bioscience, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Optimism and pessimism: a concept for behavioural ecology.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2025
    Review
  6. Helping niches may trigger the development of task specialization and division of labour.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2025
    Review
  7. The evolution of division of labour: preconditions and evolutionary feedback.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2025
    Review
  8. Article
  9. 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

5 authors.

Marie I KaiserDepartment of Philosophy, Bielefeld University, Bielefeld, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9307-7474
Jürgen GadauInstitute for Evolution and Biodiversity, University of Münster, Münster, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1258-5379
Sylvia KaiserDepartment of Behavioural Biology, Bielefeld University, Bielefeld, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2770-7367
Caroline MüllerDepartment of Chemical Ecology, Bielefeld University, Bielefeld, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8447-534X
S Helene RichterDepartment of Behavioural Biology, Bielefeld University, Bielefeld, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5990-0087

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

What are social niches, and how do they arise and change? Our first goal in the present article is to clarify the concept of an individualized social niche and to distinguish it from related concepts, such as a social environment and a social role. We argue that focal individuals are integral parts of individualized social niches and that social interactions with conspecifics are further core elements of social niches. Our second goal in the present article is to characterize three types of processes-social niche construction, conformance, and choice (social NC

Indexed as

individualized nicheniche choiceniche conformanceniche constructionsocial environmentsocial interactionssocial nichesocial niche specializationsocial role

Identifiers

PMID38560618
PMCPMC10977865

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.