Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 442

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Intensity of Competition Versus its Importance: An Overlooked Distinction and Some Implications

Welden, Charles W., Slauson, William L.·1986·The Quarterly Review of Biology

Abstract

The intensity of competition is a physiological concept, related directly to the well-being of individual organisms but only indirectly and conditionally to their fitness, and even more indirectly to the evolution of populations and the structure of communities. The importance of competition is primarily an ecological and evolutionary concept, related directly to the ecology and fitness of individuals but only indirectly to their physiological states. The intensity of competition is not necessarily correlated with the intensities of predation, disturbance, abiotic stress, or other ecological processes. The importance of competition is necessarily relative to the importances of other processes. Intensity refers primarily to the process of present competition, whereas importance refers primarily to the products of past competition. The distinction between the intensity and the importance of competition clarifies two long-standing ecological debates. Some ecologists have proposed that competition is greater in more stressful habitats, others the opposite, and still others that no such relationship exists. Evidence cited to refute or support these positions often confuses intensity and importance. Distinguishing between them focuses questions more sharply and indicates what sorts of new evidence should be sought. The more widely known debate over the prevalence of competition as an agent of community structure is a debate about the importance of competition, but evidence about the intensity of competition has often been used by both sides. We argue that intensity and importance need not be correlated, and so measurements of the intensity of competition are not directly relevant to this debate. This distinction also generates testable hypotheses and suggests directions for research. For example, we hypothesize that competition can be unimportant even if it is very intense: no such hypothesis is possible unless importance is distinguished from intensity. We discuss the application of these ideas to methods and theories used to study competition, ecological communities, and the evolution of competitive ability. We advocate a research approach that presumes multiple, interacting causes, including competition, affecting community structure, and we show how the distinction between intensity and importance helps to make this feasible.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1086/414724

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 2 references

Metadata

Authors
Welden, C. W., & Slauson, W. L.
Venue
The Quarterly Review of Biology
Published
1986-03
Volume
61
Issue
1
Pages
23-44
ISSN
  • 0033-5770 (ISSN-L)
  • 1539-7718
OpenAlex
W2090906467
Cited by
442
References
2
FWCI
12.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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 Intensity of Competition Versus its Importance: An Overlooked Distinction and Some Implications. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/414724
The paper
Welden, C. W., & Slauson, W. L. (1986). The Intensity of Competition Versus its Importance: An Overlooked Distinction and Some Implications. The Quarterly Review of Biology. https://doi.org/10.1086/414724

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.