The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
INDIVIDUAL BEHAVIOURAL CHARACTERISTICS AND DOMINANCE IN AVIARY GROUPS OF GREAT TITS
Abstract
In previous work we have shown that juvenile male great tits Parus major show consistent behavioural differences in exploratory and aggressive behaviour. Fast and superficial explorers (FE) won from slow and thorough explorers (SE) during controlled pair-wise confrontations in small cages. The present study assesses the relationship between early exploratory behaviour and later dominance in aviary groups of juvenile male great tits; such groups might approach natural conditions better than 'simple' pair-wise confrontations. Observations of nine aviary groups showed that a stable hierarchy is only established after a first dynamic phase of several days with many dominance shifts and a peak in number of interactions. In seven other aviary groups we determined the dominance relationships between FE and SE. In a stable hierarchy, SE had on average a significantly higher dominance score than FE. This finding contrasts our previous results in pair-wise confrontations. However, on the first day in the aviary, FE had on average a higher dominance score and initiated more fights than SE. This agrees with our previous results and indicates a gradual development of the situation in the stable hierarchy. Behavioural observations indicate that during this development, FE took more risks in their fighting behaviour and had more difficulty to cope with defeat than SE. In the stable hierarchy they either won or lost from all SE. SE were more cautious and had intermediate dominance scores in the stable hierarchy. These differences in fighting behaviour and the role of individual differences in exploratory behaviour and in coping with defeat are discussed as possible causes for the unexpected results of this study.
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
Artificial selection for short and long attack latencies in wildMus musculus domesticus
van Oortmerssen, G. A., & Bakker, T. C. M. (1981) · Behavior Genetics · doi:10.1007/bf01065622 · Cited by 263
Cited by
Integrating animal temperament within ecology and evolution
Réale, D., Reader, S. M., Sol, D., McDougall, P. T., & Dingemanse, N. J. (2007) · Biological Reviews · doi:10.1111/j.1469-185x.2007.00010.x · Cited by 3,132
Korte, S. M., Koolhaas, J. M., Wingfield, J. C., & McEwen, B. S. (2005) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2004.08.009 · Cited by 1,097
Early life stress and development: potential mechanisms for adverse outcomes
Smith, K. E., & Pollak, S. D. (2020) · Journal of Neurodevelopmental Disorders · doi:10.1186/s11689-020-09337-y · Cited by 500
Ecological Aspects of Neophobia and neophilia in birds
Greenberg, R., & Mettke-hofmann, C. (2001) · Current Ornithology, Volume 16 · doi:10.1007/978-1-4615-1211-0_3 · Cited by 398
Individual differences in the use of social information in foraging by captive great tits
Marchetti, C., & Drent, P. J. (2000) · Animal Behaviour · doi:10.1006/anbe.2000.1443 · Cited by 301
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Verbeek, M. E. M., Goede, P. D., Drent, P., & Wiepkema, P.
- Venue
- Behaviour
- Publisher
- Walter de Gruyter GmbH
- Published
- 1999
- Volume
- 136
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 23-48
- ISSN
- 0005-7959 (ISSN-L)
- 1568-539X
- OpenAlex
- W1994758563
- Cited by
- 162
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 4.74
- 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: INDIVIDUAL BEHAVIOURAL CHARACTERISTICS AND DOMINANCE IN AVIARY GROUPS OF GREAT TITS. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1163/156853999500659
- The paper
- Verbeek, M. E. M., Goede, P. D., Drent, P., & Wiepkema, P. (1999). INDIVIDUAL BEHAVIOURAL CHARACTERISTICS AND DOMINANCE IN AVIARY GROUPS OF GREAT TITS. Behaviour. https://doi.org/10.1163/156853999500659
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.