Cited by 48Animal Behavior and ReproductionAvian ecology and behaviorAnimal Vocal Communication and Behavior

Peahens prefer peacocks displaying more eyespots, but rarely

Dakin, Roslyn, Montgomerie, Robert·2011·Animal Behaviour

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.anbehav.2011.03.016

Cites

26 of 26 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dakin, R., & Montgomerie, R.
Affiliations
Queen's University (CA)
Corresponding author
Dakin, Roslyn
Venue
Animal Behaviour
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2011-07
Volume
82
Issue
1
Pages
21-28
ISSN
0003-3472 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2155922821
Cited by
48
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 3
FWCI
3.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Animal Behaviour (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
  • Society of Canadian Ornithologists
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Animal Behavior and Reproduction
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Avian ecology and behavior
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Developmental Biology › Animal Vocal Communication and Behavior
Keywords
peafowl, Pavo cristatus, eyespots, female mate choice, mate choice, sexual selection, courtship display, mating success, feral populations, ornamentation

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