The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Animal personality: what are behavioural ecologists measuring?
Open accessAbstract
The discovery that an individual may be constrained, and even behave sub‐optimally, because of its personality type has fundamental implications for understanding individual‐ to group‐level processes. Despite recent interest in the study of animal personalities within behavioural ecology, the field is fraught with conceptual and methodological difficulties inherent in any young discipline. We review the current agreement of definitions and methods used in personality studies across taxa and systems, and find that current methods risk misclassifying traits. Fortunately, these problems have been faced before by other similar fields during their infancy, affording important opportunities to learn from past mistakes. We review the tools that were developed to overcome similar methodological problems in psychology. These tools emphasise the importance of attempting to measure animal personality traits using multiple tests and the care that needs to be taken when interpreting correlations between personality traits or their tests. Accordingly, we suggest an integrative theoretical framework that incorporates these tools to facilitate a robust and unified approach in the study of animal personality.
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
Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix.
Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/h0046016 · Cited by 17,116
Construct validity in psychological tests.
Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/h0040957 · Cited by 11,195
The development of markers for the Big-Five factor structure
Goldberg, L. R. (1992) · Psychological Assessment · doi:10.1037/1040-3590.4.1.26 · Cited by 5,530
Toward a cognitive social learning reconceptualization of personality
Mischel, W. (1973) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/h0035002 · Cited by 3,181 · cited 2×
“Strong situations may leave little variation between individuals’ behaviour whereas weaker situations may allow more inter-individual differences to show (Mischel, 1973a,b).”
BackgroundA contrarian view of the five-factor approach to personality description.
Block, J. (1995) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.117.2.187 · Cited by 1,682 · cited 3×
“Biological Reviews © 2012 Cambridge Philosophical Society measurements load with others (but see Block, 1995, for a criticism of data reduction techniques for this purpose).”
BackgroundScala naturae: Why there is no theory in comparative psychology.
Hodos, W., & Campbell, C. B. G. (1969) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/h0027523 · Cited by 583
Cited by
Avoiding the misuse of BLUP in behavioural ecology
Houslay, T. M., & Wilson, A. J. (2017) · Behavioral Ecology · doi:10.1093/beheco/arx023 · Cited by 312
Boldness at the nest predicts foraging and diving behaviour of female but not male African penguins
Traisnel, G., & Pichegru, L. (2019) · Animal Behaviour · doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2019.02.003 · Cited by 23
Dissegna, A., & Chiandetti, C. (2025) · Journal of Experimental Biology · doi:10.1242/jeb.249626 · Cited by 7
Metadata
- Authors
- Carter, A. J., Feeney, W. E., Marshall, H. H., Cowlishaw, G., & Heinsohn, R.
- Venue
- Biological Reviews
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2012-12-18
- Volume
- 88
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 465-475
- ISSN
- 0006-3231 (ISSN-L)
- 1464-7931
- 1469-185X
- OpenAlex
- W1558792683
- Cited by
- 712
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 3.58
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: Animal personality: what are behavioural ecologists measuring? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/brv.12007
- The paper
- Carter, A. J., Feeney, W. E., Marshall, H. H., Cowlishaw, G., & Heinsohn, R. (2013). Animal personality: what are behavioural ecologists measuring? Biological Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.12007
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.