Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 295

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Coloniality in the cliff swallow: the effect of group size on social behavior

·1996·Choice Reviews Online

Abstract

Many animal species live and breed in colonies. Although biologists have documented numerous costs (increased competition for limited resources) and benefits (more pairs of eyes to watch for predators) of group living, they often still do not agree on why coloniality evolved in the first place. Drawing on their 12-year study of a population of cliff swallows in Nebraska, USA, the authors investigate 26 social and ecological costs and benefits of coloniality. They explore how these costs and benefits are reflected in reproductive success and survivorship, and speculate on the evolution of cliff swallow coloniality. This study of vertebrate coloniality should be of interest to all who study social animals, including behavioural ecologists, population biologists, ornithologists and parasitologists. Its focus on the evolution of coloniality should also appeal to evolutionary biologists and to psychologists studying decision making in animals. authors' research on swallows was the subject of an award-winning exhibition at the Peabody Museum of Natural History in New Haven, Connecticut, and was included in the BBC television production, The Trials of Life.

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 · 10.5860/choice.34-1543

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.

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

Cited by

See all 295

Metadata

Venue
Choice Reviews Online
Published
1996-11-01
Volume
34
Issue
03
Pages
34-1543-34-1543
ISSN
  • 0009-4978 (ISSN-L)
  • 1523-8253
OpenAlex
W1981701994
Cited by
295
References
0
Type
book review
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: Coloniality in the cliff swallow: the effect of group size on social behavior. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5860/choice.34-1543
The paper
Coloniality in the cliff swallow: the effect of group size on social behavior. (1996). Choice Reviews Online. https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.34-1543

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.