Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 215

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

Mixed conditional logistic regression for habitat selection studies

Duchesne, Thierry, Fortin, Daniel, Courbin, Nicolas·2010·Journal of Animal Ecology

Abstract

Summary: 1. Resource selection functions (RSFs) are becoming a dominant tool in habitat selection studies. RSF coefficients can be estimated with unconditional (standard) and conditional logistic regressions. While the advantage of mixed‐effects models is recognized for standard logistic regression, mixed conditional logistic regression remains largely overlooked in ecological studies. 2. We demonstrate the significance of mixed conditional logistic regression for habitat selection studies. First, we use spatially explicit models to illustrate how mixed‐effects RSFs can be useful in the presence of inter‐individual heterogeneity in selection and when the assumption of independence from irrelevant alternatives (IIA) is violated. The IIA hypothesis states that the strength of preference for habitat type A over habitat type B does not depend on the other habitat types also available. Secondly, we demonstrate the significance of mixed‐effects models to evaluate habitat selection of free‐ranging bison Bison bison. 3. When movement rules were homogeneous among individuals and the IIA assumption was respected, fixed‐effects RSFs adequately described habitat selection by simulated animals. In situations violating the inter‐individual homogeneity and IIA assumptions, however, RSFs were best estimated with mixed‐effects regressions, and fixed‐effects models could even provide faulty conclusions. 4. Mixed‐effects models indicate that bison did not select farmlands, but exhibited strong inter‐individual variations in their response to farmlands. Less than half of the bison preferred farmlands over forests. Conversely, the fixed‐effect model simply suggested an overall selection for farmlands. 5. Conditional logistic regression is recognized as a powerful approach to evaluate habitat selection when resource availability changes. This regression is increasingly used in ecological studies, but almost exclusively in the context of fixed‐effects models. Fitness maximization can imply differences in trade‐offs among individuals, which can yield inter‐individual differences in selection and lead to departure from IIA. These situations are best modelled with mixed‐effects models. Mixed‐effects conditional logistic regression should become a valuable tool for ecological 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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1365-2656.2010.01670.x

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

Cited by

See all 215

Metadata

Authors
Duchesne, T., Fortin, D., & Courbin, N.
Venue
Journal of Animal Ecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2010-03-22
Volume
79
Issue
3
Pages
548-555
ISSN
  • 0021-8790 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2656
OpenAlex
W2047095435
Cited by
215
References
2
FWCI
6.16
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: Mixed conditional logistic regression for habitat selection studies. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-2656.2010.01670.x
The paper
Duchesne, T., Fortin, D., & Courbin, N. (2010). Mixed conditional logistic regression for habitat selection studies. Journal of Animal Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2656.2010.01670.x

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.