↓ Skip to main content

Science Advances

Article Metrics

Consensus and experience trump leadership, suppressing individual personality during social foraging

Overview of attention for article published in Science Advances, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
5 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
44 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
3 Google+ users

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
67 Mendeley
citeulike
4 CiteULike
Title
Consensus and experience trump leadership, suppressing individual personality during social foraging
Published in
Science Advances, September 2016
DOI 10.1126/sciadv.1600892
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nicholas D. McDonald, Sean A. Rands, Francesca Hill, Charlotte Elder, Christos C. Ioannou

Abstract

Whether individual behavior in social settings correlates with behavior when individuals are alone is a fundamental question in collective behavior. However, evidence for whether behavior correlates across asocial and social settings is mixed, and no study has linked observed trends with underlying mechanisms. Consistent differences between individuals in boldness, which describes willingness to accept reward over risk, are likely to be under strong selection pressure. By testing three-spined sticklebacks (Gasterosteus aculeatus) in a risky foraging task alone and repeatedly in shoals, we demonstrate that the expression of boldness in groups is context-specific. Whereas personality is repeatable in a low-risk behavior (leaving a refuge), the collectively made consensus decision to then cross the arena outweighs leadership by bolder individuals, explaining the suppression of personality in this context. However, despite this social coordination, bolder individuals were still more likely to feed. Habituation and satiation over repeated trials degrade the effect of personality on leaving the refuge and also whether crossing the arena is a collective decision. The suppression of personality in groups suggests that individual risk-taking tendency may rarely represent actual risk in social settings, with implications for the evolution and ecology of personality variation.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 44 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 67 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Lecturer 1 1%
Other 1 1%
Unknown 65 97%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 2 3%
Unknown 65 97%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 79. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 31 January 2019.
All research outputs
#190,948
of 12,837,341 outputs
Outputs from Science Advances
#1,014
of 2,767 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,958
of 263,108 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science Advances
#57
of 133 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,837,341 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,767 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 126.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 263,108 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 133 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.