The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The repeatability of behaviour: a meta-analysis
Open accessAbstract
There is increasing interest in individual differences in animal behaviour. Recent research now suggests that an individual’s behaviour, once considered to be plastic, may be more predictable than previously thought. Here, we take advantage of the large number of studies that have estimated the repeatability of various behaviours to evaluate whether there is good evidence for consistent individual differences in behaviour and to answer some outstanding questions about possible factors that can influence repeatability. Specifically, we use meta-analysis to ask whether different types of behaviours were more repeatable than others, and if repeatability estimates depended on taxa, sex, age, field versus laboratory, the number of measures and the interval between measures. Some of the overall patterns that were revealed by this analysis were that repeatability estimates were higher in the field compared to the laboratory and repeatability was higher when the interval between observations was short. Mate preference behaviour was one of the best studied but least repeatable behaviours. Our findings prompt new insights into the relative flexibility of different types of behaviour and offer suggestions for the design and analysis of future research.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Analyzing Tables of Statistical Tests
Rice, W. R. (1989) · Evolution · doi:10.2307/2409177 · Cited by 14,571
The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results.
Rosenthal, R. (1979) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.86.3.638 · Cited by 9,068
Coping styles in animals: current status in behavior and stress-physiology
Koolhaas, J. M., Korte, S. M., De Boer, S. F., Van Der Vegt, B. J., Van Reenen, C. G., Hopster, H., De Jong, I. C., Ruis, M. A. W., & Blokhuis, H. J. (1999) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/s0149-7634(99)00026-3 · Cited by 2,999 · cited 1×
“…doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2008.12.022 syndromes (Sih et al. 2004a), temperament (Reale et al. 2007), personality (Gosling 2001) and coping styles (Koolhaas et al. 1999), all of which generally refer to behavioural consistency through time and across situations, repeatability is more restrictive…”
BackgroundInfluential
Cited by
Repeatability for Gaussian and non-Gaussian data: a practical guide for biologists.
Nakagawa, S., & Schielzeth, H. (2010) · Biological Reviews · doi:10.1111/j.1469-185x.2010.00141.x · Cited by 2,584
rptR: repeatability estimation and variance decomposition by generalized linear mixed‐effects models
Stoffel, M. A., Nakagawa, S., & Schielzeth, H. (2017) · Methods in Ecology and Evolution · doi:10.1111/2041-210x.12797 · Cited by 1,766
Northrup, J. M., Vander Wal, E., Bonar, M., Fieberg, J., Laforge, M. P., Leclerc, M., Prokopenko, C. M., & Gerber, B. D. (2022) · Ecological Applications · doi:10.1002/eap.2470 · Cited by 227
“Individuals in a population can display variability in a myriad of behavioral characteristics (Bell et al. 2009), including individual differences in habitat selection (Leclerc et al. 2016, Hertel et al. 2019).”
BackgroundDammhahn, M., & Almeling, L. (2012) · Animal Behaviour · doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2012.08.014 · Cited by 208
Perspectives on Individual Animal Identification from Biology and Computer Vision
Vidal, M., Wolf, N., Rosenberg, B., Harris, B. P., & Mathis, A. (2021) · Integrative and Comparative Biology · doi:10.1093/icb/icab107 · Cited by 104
Metadata
- Authors
- Bell, A. M., Hankison, S. J., & Laskowski, K. L.
- Venue
- Animal Behaviour
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2009-04
- Volume
- 77
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 771-783
- ISSN
- 0003-3472 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2121043175
- Cited by
- 2,128
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 8.23
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The repeatability of behaviour: a meta-analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.anbehav.2008.12.022
- The paper
- Bell, A. M., Hankison, S. J., & Laskowski, K. L. (2009). The repeatability of behaviour: a meta-analysis. Animal Behaviour. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2008.12.022
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.