Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38562050›Full record

ArticleeLife2024

Risk-sensitive learning is a winning strategy for leading an urban invasion.

Alexis J Breen, Dominik Deffner

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in eLife, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Alexis J BreenDepartment of Human Behavior, Ecology and Culture, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Leipzig, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2331-0920
Dominik DeffnerScience of Intelligence Excellence Cluster, Technical University Berlin, Berlin, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1649-3861

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the unpredictable Anthropocene, a particularly pressing open question is how certain species invade urban environments. Sex-biased dispersal and learning arguably influence movement ecology, but their joint influence remains unexplored empirically, and might vary by space and time. We assayed reinforcement learning in wild-caught, temporarily captive core-, middle-, or edge-range great-tailed grackles-a bird species undergoing urban-tracking rapid range expansion, led by dispersing males. We show, across populations, both sexes initially perform similarly when learning stimulus-reward pairings, but, when reward contingencies reverse, male-versus female-grackles finish 'relearning' faster, making fewer choice-option switches. How do male grackles do this? Bayesian cognitive modelling revealed male grackles' choice behaviour is governed more strongly by the 'weight' of relative differences in recent foraging payoffs-i.e., they show more pronounced risk-sensitive learning. Confirming this mechanism, agent-based forward simulations of reinforcement learning-where we simulate 'birds' based on empirical estimates of our grackles' reinforcement learning-replicate our sex-difference behavioural data. Finally, evolutionary modelling revealed natural selection should favour risk-sensitive learning in hypothesised urban-like environments: stable but stochastic settings. Together, these results imply risk-sensitive learning is a winning strategy for urban-invasion leaders, underscoring the potential for life history

Indexed as

LearningPasseriformesAnimalsBayes TheoremCognitionFemaleHumansMaleReinforcement, Psychologycognitiondispersalecologyevolutionary biologygreat-tailed gracklesrapid range expansionreinforcement learningsex differences

Identifiers

PMID38562050
PMCPMC10987091

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.