ArticleEcology and evolution2026
Drivers of Taxonomic Bias in Ecology and Evolution: Insights From Ethologists and Behavioural Ecologists.
Article in Ecology and evolution, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Taxonomic bias, that is, the disproportionate attention given to some taxa relative to their diversity, continues to hinder innovation and the pursuit of generality in ecology and evolution. Yet, the factors shaping ecologists' and evolutionary biologists' choices of study organisms mostly remain a mystery. We propose a framework explaining researchers' taxonomic choices along three major axes, supported by evidence from a preregistered survey of 868 researchers' experiences. First, rational considerations, such as logistical ease and societal relevance, were associated with the choice of research organisms within major animal groups but rarely across them. Second, contextual factors, like the prominence of certain organisms within peer networks or early-career exposure to specific taxa, were also associated with researchers' decisions about which organisms to study. Third, emotional factors, including taxonomic affinities, closely mirrored taxonomic patterns in the literature, indicating that they are a major driver of organism choice at broad taxonomic scales. Based on these findings, we suggest actions to mitigate taxonomic bias, including promoting (i) outreach initiatives featuring neglected taxa, (ii) taxonomically equitable education and (iii) taxonomically diverse research experiences.
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.